Really? Y'all can't read base64? 😉
I always have to remember to tell Lookout to use plain text for Profox replies and in this case I clearly neglected to do that. Since Ed already translated on my behalf all I can say is mea culpa and I'll do better next time. Or you can come to SWFox and yell at me in person. There are still a few in-person slots left...
--
rk
From: ProfoxTech profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com On Behalf Of Ed Leafe Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 6:03 PM To: profoxtech@leafe.com Subject: Re: Outlook Automation Help Needed
On Aug 12, 2024, at 16:50, Kurt Wendt mailto:kurthwendt@gmail.com wrote:
Hey there Richard - I'm having a problem understanding your Question/Problem - when you talk in Alien Speak!!!
I'm sure I'm not the only one...
First, some outlook emails are sent base64 encoded - I have no idea why. You can copy the gibberish text and paste in an online tool like https://url.us.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/gHgbCM8E2JuqRA33I1uMu2G7wY?domain=too... and it will decode it for you.
So I did just that, and the email had the following line:
Refactor time. 😊 You should be able to swap out those SEEK function + !FOUND() calls with a single INDEXSEEK call.
followed by the complete text of Paul's message, including the full program text. IOW, there were 115 characters of actual new message out of 7792 characters total, which is less that 1.5% of the message. Nothing personal against Richard, but rather Microsoft, and their idiotic default of top quoting and including the full text of the message being replied to.
Sorry, but wasteful practices piss me off, and I just wanted to vent.
-- Ed Leafe