[MlMt] Multiple rule interactions (was "Re: Filter(?) Message is moved to trash")

Robert Brenstein mailmate at learning-insights.eu
Tue Nov 23 05:47:07 EST 2021

I was using such moving as you describe when I was using Eudora. 
Switching from POP to IMAP changed the paradigm. With Mailmate, I just 
leave messages in the Inbox and instead of moving have smart mailboxes 
to show those selected messages. For what you describe as Inbox, I have 
a smart mailbox called incoming. Same end effect with no physical 
movements and actually more control.


On 22 Nov 2021, at 23:32, Randall Gellens wrote:

> I have some accounts where the Inbox rules are first a set of rules 
> that each check for a certain value in a header field (often, the 
> 'List-ID' field), and if so, add a keyword to the message and move it 
> to a list-specific mailbox. Then there's a rule that, if the the 'To' 
> and 'Cc' header fields do not contain my address and the keyword added 
> by the earlier rules doesn't appear, then move the message to a 
> catch-all mailbox. The intent is that the messages left in the Inbox 
> were addressed to me, messages for certain lists I care about are 
> moved to their list-specific mailboxes, and everything else is in the 
> catch-all mailbox.
> However, what ends up happening is that messages are moved to the 
> catch-all mailbox despite an earlier rule moving them to a 
> list-specific mailbox (as evidenced by the keyword having been added). 
> Are rules processed in an aggregate way, so that an earlier rule that 
> moves a message is counteracted by a later rule? And an earlier rule 
> that adds a keyword doesn't actually add it until after all rules have 
> finished, so that other rules can't test it?
> --Randall
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freron.com/pipermail/mailmate/attachments/20211123/38280fda/attachment.htm>

More information about the mailmate mailing list