[Users] That won't work.

[Little Girl]

Hey there,

Jeremy Nicoll wrote:
>Little Girl wrote:

>> Just out of curiosity, are those of you who use this sort of method
>> creating just one folder for each sender and keeping all incoming
>> and archived mail in it or are you creating separate folders for
>> incoming and archived mail for each sender?  

>For me that depends mainly on volume of traffic from that person/
>class of people.

Okay.

>Eg email addresses that my "best friends" use to contact me all 
>contain ".bf." in their lefthand part, and mail from all those
>people ends up in a single folder.  I don't get a lot of those mails
>- not because I have no friends, but because they also contact me on
>Facebook and by phone.

That makes sense. I do have a lot of folders, so concatenating some
of that would actually be an advantage.

>On the other hand everything financial is one folder per bank, 
>regardless of volume of messages.

That makes sense, too, and I'd do the same.

>In every case there may be no archive, or just a single archive
>folder, or one per year or one per 2-3 months... all under the
>corresponding main folder - depending on the volume of msgs
>to be kept (which is different from the volume I receive).  Eg the 
>volume received is very often one per day - from companies who
>continually send me sales info, or news organisations ... but I 
>hardly ever keep any of those.

Interesting. You seem to have a system that's customized on several
levels. I may end up needing to do that, too.

Thank you for your response, too. I appreciate seeing how each of you
approaches this sort of thing.

-- 
Little Girl

There is no spoon.