In each accounts folder on Mail\<accountname> or Imapmail\<accountname> will be found a file named msgfilterrules.dat. If everything is identical between the two PCs, then you could copy one to the other.This is a simple text file, so you could read it in notepad if desired.

Hello David:

Firstly, THANK YOU for your prompt response. I truly appreciate it. Your response was compelling and I dove in this morning when I returned to my office. No joy.

I found msgfilterrules.dat hiding in Mail/Local Folders. However, as a matter of course, I copy the entirety of Local Folders back and forth between the desktop and laptop computers, so msgfilterrules.dat "rides" along either way.

Two of my four filters still work on the laptop but not the main machine. Is there another determinant here, sir?

Perhaps I should mention that I'm running macOS 12.7.1 on both platforms and perhaps there is a different code-path being used in that case. I truly don't know.

Again, I completely appreciate your time and your help, sir.

Sincerely, Bob

Puzzling. Is the layout the same? That is, same folder structure, such as Mail\accountname, etc? To my knowledge, the filters should work if the underlying file and folders are identical. Screenshots of the desktop and laptop Mail folders (for POP) and of the Imapmail for imap may be helpful. I am not a filter guru, but I'll assist where I can.

HI David:

Yes, the layout on both machines is precisely the same. What's even more puzzling is that two of four filters work and two do not.

I tried removing the filters and re-creating them. Nope. Taking your advice, I copied msgfilterrules.dat between the two machines, even though that file is already "along for the ride".

Going back into Finder/Library/Thunderbird and searching for msgfilterrules.dat reveals that there are ten copies residing there, some within separate mail accounts that I keep. I wish I could show you a screenshot.

However, it's VERY tempting for me to copy one version of this file over to the "root" folder Local Folders. Heck, it couldn't hurt. What do you think, sir?

Bob

I would be hesitant to place that file indiscriminately. And it might be ignored if not in it's normal place. Also, these are simple text files, so you could read them in a text editor to see what differences there are between the two platforms. I encourage that, as it may cause an "aha moment" in the differences.

Hello David:

THANK YOU sir. I have examined two of the files and I find that there are filters for each individual mail account (of which I have four).

These files are indeed different and I can interpret from what I see here that they are different filters for different actions.

This begs a deeper question that I've always wanted to ask: Are filters to be set up globally for ALL mail accounts or are they supposed to be particular to EACH mail account? That is, each account has it's own, individual filters that do different things? I confess that my own ignorance of this architecture may have led me into problems of my own manufacture.

I've never had the ear of a TB expert before, hence the question, sir.

Sincerely, Bob

First, you flatter me; I am far from being a guru, as there are a few here who can solve unbelievable problems. However, on filters, they are intended on an account basis, not global. Some believe that is a shortcoming, but the intent is to allow more custom treatment at the account level.

David:

Thanks sir. For a little fluffy dog, you're pretty smart. It reminds me not to judge a book by its cover(!).

I will do a complete, methodical review of all my filters, hoping (with all my heart) not to have to reinstall TB (more involved than one might think).

Some say, "Come up to the current level and all your problems will go away." This is not universally true in my experience as filters are likely to be RETAINED with an upgrade. Nevertheless, if you think that is a good idea, I can come up to 115.5.1.

Again, thanks for all your help. This one is a head-scratcher.

Sincerely, Bob

First, I agree that upgrading solves some problems, but usually introduces new problems of its own. That's not a criticism, just acknowledging that complex software can never be fully tested because the combinations of steps would be in the thousands. Ver 115 gets better with each release and I feel comfortable with it and I like the new layout and features. There is much new code to replace a mess of overlapping and clumsy code that has amassed over two decades. If you're comfortable with 102, there is no rush, but at some point, you will need to make the jump. Before doing, be sure to do a full backup, if only to be safe. Ver 115 has some menu changes and that has annoyed some, but they're quickly learned. You're right; filters did NOT change a bit.

Filters only work for me when I manually run them. They are suppose to run before Spam check and put the items depending on email to specific folder.

Since I have email coming in all the time it is a PITA to constantly be manually running the tool to execute what it is suppose to do when the mail comes in.

Version 115.6.0 64bit (The Cruddy Font Version)

All:

As stated in my original problem report, all my filters used to work automatically (as they're supposed to). All except one, that is, and it just STOPPED working.

AND YET, it works fine on a second machine, my travel laptop. Confounding.

Yesterday I upgraded to the latest version (115.5.2). I then deleted all filters and using the example from my laptop rebuilt them all. Three of my four filters DO WORK, but then they always did. It's the one for a Mainframe computer discussion group that doesn't work. I'm well aware of GIGO problems, so I stared hard at the offending filter, but I didn't catch an error.

I never expected that upgrading TB would yield any new results, and it has not. I'm still confused.

THANKS, Bob

Puzzling. If the filter that works on other PC was copied directly and doesn't work, I have no idea. But, if you rewrote the filter on this PC, then posting a screenshot of the failing filter may let others here provide an extra opinion.

Hello David:

THANKS for spending time on this, sir. It is most appreciated.

Often having another look over one's shoulder can reveal a problem that just isn't apparent to the initial user. I hope that happens in this case.

Here is a screen-shot, sir.

B

It looks fine to me. I would compare in detail to the filter on other PC. My approach would be to review the email address to see how short I could make it and still be unique. I would also suggest testing with the FROM address, assuming it is consistent. And maybe even change from 'match all' to 'match any', my strategy being to get it to work, not to diagnose if the filter is working fully.

As an aside, may I infer that you once wrote IBM OS assembler? I remember it well. :)

Hi David:

Sage advice, and I'll keep at this using your directive. Thank you.

I myself have never written Assembler (except in school), but I've spent 35 years working with very talented people who do. You could say I've been steeped in their intellectual rigor for some time.

Good engineering is beautiful, though many in the outside world wouldn't understand that. Coming up with an elegant solution that is bullet-proof... You can't tell me it isn't art.

B

Fully agree.  :)