I'm experimenting around with TB so I can help out a relative who is
having problems creating a POP3 account with Charter (or "Spectrum" or
whatever they're calling themselves these days) and, on my own computer,
tried to get to where I can create a new email _account_. To do this, I:

1. Clicked on the hamburger
2. Clicked on "New"
3. Clicked on "Get a New Email Account..."

You would expect that this would be the straight-forward instructions
for accomplishing the task, but that's not the case:

What opens is a tab titled "Create a new email _address_" (NOTE:
"address", NOT "account) that only seems to allow me to "Buy a new email
address" from Thunderbird's partner "Mailfence" and to "Buy an email and
domain of (my) own" from Thunderbird's other partner "Gandi". I've put
up a screenshot of this window on Imgur. If you want to see what I'm
talking about, go here: https://imgur.com/a/kozZGwK

There is a subtle difference between what I wanted, which was to be able
to _create a new email account_, and what Thunderbird is attempting to
trick me into doing, which is to "Create a new email address".

The Thunderbird developers have buried the steps to create a new email
_account_ (eg. with your own ISP if they provide email service) way down
within the TB account settings window. To do this:

1. Click on the dreaded and hated hamburger
2. Click on "Account Settings" so that the "Account Settings" tab opens
3. On the left side of the screen, click on the "Account Actions"
dropdown (note that this is absolutely the incorrect place for this
procedure to be hidden, because the account settings you would expect
would only apply to the account you have selected above that dropdown)
4. Click on "Add Email Account..."

A window will now open which is titled "Set Up Your Existing Email
Address". _THIS_ is the window that should open when I follow the first
set of instructions I provided above.

It seems clear to me that the Thunderbird developers are trying to trick
newbies into buying Mailfence email addresses and buying Gandi email and
domains.

To me, this is the very definition of reprehensible and duplicitous
conduct. Or am I missing something?

--
John C.

John C. wrote:
> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)

Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
send to Eternal-September.

--
John C.

On 29 Nov 2023 02:48:30 -0800 John C. wrote:
>John C. wrote:
>> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)
>
>Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
>send to Eternal-September.
>

Me too - I ended up with a double post. I think it timed out.
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

On 29.11.23 13:56, Dave Royal wrote:
> On 29 Nov 2023 02:48:30 -0800 John C. wrote:
>> John C. wrote:
>>> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)
>>
>> Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
>> send to Eternal-September.
>>
>
> Me too - I ended up with a double post. I think it timed out.

Happened to me again as well.
Only E-S has this issues with spam at the moment.

--
Sent with Betterbird by a Penguin.
Simply better. www.betterbird.eu

On 29/11/2023 13:03, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> On 29.11.23 13:56, Dave Royal wrote:
>> On 29 Nov 2023 02:48:30 -0800 John C. wrote:
>>> John C. wrote:
>>>> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)
>>>
>>> Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
>>> send to Eternal-September.
>>>
>>
>> Me too - I ended up with a double post. I think it timed out.
>
> Happened to me again as well.
> Only E-S has this issues with spam at the moment.
>

ES has been suffering from server overload problems it says over in ES
support (x-posted)

This is being discussed there under thread titled

"transient send rejections"

Andy

On 29 Nov 2023 15:34:17 +0000 Vir Campestris wrote:
>On 29/11/2023 13:03, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> On 29.11.23 13:56, Dave Royal wrote:
>>> On 29 Nov 2023 02:48:30 -0800 John C. wrote:
>>>> John C. wrote:
>>>>> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)
>>>>
>>>> Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
>>>> send to Eternal-September.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Me too - I ended up with a double post. I think it timed out.
>>
>> Happened to me again as well.
>> Only E-S has this issues with spam at the moment.
>>
>
>ES has been suffering from server overload problems it says over in ES
>support (x-posted)
>
>This is being discussed there under thread titled
>
>"transient send rejections"

In my case the duplicate was me sending it again. I should have been more
patient - since then I've had to wait a minute or so, but eventually got a
response.
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

Dave Royal wrote:
> Vir Campestris wrote:
>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Dave Royal wrote:
>>>> John C. wrote:
>>>>> John C. wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm experimenting around with TB (snip)
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry about the double post. I was having trouble getting the message to
>>>>> send to Eternal-September.
>>>>
>>>> Me too - I ended up with a double post. I think it timed out.
>>>
>>> Happened to me again as well.
>>> Only E-S has this issues with spam at the moment.
>>
>> ES has been suffering from server overload problems it says over in ES
>> support (x-posted)

Thanks for that info, Vir (or is it Andy?)

>> This is being discussed there under thread titled
>>
>> "transient send rejections"
>
> In my case the duplicate was me sending it again. I should have been more
> patient - since then I've had to wait a minute or so, but eventually got a
> response.

Yes, that was what happened to me too. And the problem has been going on
for a long time, but only infrequently.

--
John C.