On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Kevin Parris wrote: > Are the problem messages NEW items, or written as replies to other > posts? Are the originals, to which the blackberry replies, from the > same origin? I'm suggesting that perhaps your sometimes-garbled results > may be hailing from origins not necessarily in the blackberry device - > just something to think about. At first we thought that the problem occurred only when he replied to a post, but that proved not to be true. Then we thought there was a line-wrap problem, but that theory also fell by the wayside. Here, courtesy of my co-owner (who has been working on the problem more directly and has subscribed to the digest to monitor it), is what we know/have tried: "We already know that ... - It's not something that happens when lines exceed any particular number of characters. Charlie has tried manually wrapping lines at 30 characters. - It's not related to replying to a message. I've seen the problem when he's replied, when he's created a new message and pasted in quoted text, and when he's created a blank new message. - Every message that comes with a warning that there is an error in the headers seems also to be base 64, but I believe there have been some base 64 messages that had no warning about header errors." Jane > > >>> [log in to unmask] 3/9/2005 3:13:06 PM >>> > Yes, but why would one of those messages have looked OK in the digest, > while the second one--in the same digest, sent by the same subscriber > from the same Blackberry in the exact same way, and going through the > same Listserv server to the same recipients' same mail programs--not be > decoded? > > He is happy to make any adjustments that can be made, but we can't > figure out why his messages sometimes come through just fine and at > other times are gobbledygook. The same thing has happened with posts > from another Blackberry user--who, fortunately, posts much less often. > I'm guessing that as more people start using Blackberry, this problem > will get worse. The posts are fine in the archives, but they sure do > make a mess of the digests for some subscribers. > > >