arachne-digest Wednesday, January 22 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:22:44 -0300
From: Ariel Lachter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: floppy email client to use in cybercafe
Hi List,
In www.nakka.com, exist windows 95 email client, Npop101w.zip, with
only 85kb(zip file), that maybe work in cybercafe, to receive and
send email. I think that if you know the smtp server ( for example,
my cybercafe work with speedy from telephonica from argentina. I
search in internet : speedy+telefonica+smtp and find that smtp server
is: mai.infovia.com.ar)
and the pop3 server , with login and password, that you use in
arachne email client,
you could send and receive email directly, without to use web-email.
Where you ejecute npop.exe program, is born npop.ini, and i use npop.
ini
to change size font, to read and write emails with bigger size font.
Exist other site with help in english for this program ( I don't
remember now, if any want i could search again ).
Best regards,
Ariel Lachter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:08:20 +0000
From: "Ron Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: War on Iraq ? (Humour)
Hi Folks,
I just uploaded a graphic (50 kb) I received, purporting to be the
reason for the gathering of the clans in the middle east.
http://tadpole.aus.as/files/reason.jpg
Regards,
Ron
Ron Clarke
http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
http://tadpole.aus.as
- -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:24:29 +0000
From: "J J Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newsletters & HTML
Hello Bastiaan,
Often these images which have to be downloaded are
used to ascertain that the mail has been read, and
by whom.
If I get spam which I decide to check out, and it
seems to have an identifier, I'll alter it so someone
else gets their email address passed on to the spammers.
A horrible thing for me to do...
Best regards,
Jake Young
2003-01-21 22:23:16 GMT
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:25:28 +0300
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: usnubscribe
usnubscribe
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:53:17 +0000
From: "Ron Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Carbon14 testing and Arachne
her way.
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:12:19 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) writes:
> (previous subject: Iraq vs. N Korea)
>> People have found millions of proofs for evolution.
>> (dinosaurs which are more than a million years old [measured with
>> C14], embrios
>> which have a tale in the early development, .....................)
> Hi Ricsi,
> Actually, Carbon 14 results have an 'error swing'. This has been
> discovered by comparing dendochronology (tree ring dating) with C14
> dating. Starting from the modern era and working backward, the error is
> slightly off -showing earlier or later than actual dates (but I can't
> remember at the moment on which side the error starts) - then coming back
> to coincidence with dendochronology, then swinging the other way.
The C14 error becomes significant at about 40,000 years.
Fortunately, there are other isotopes that are more reliable, such
as potassium, silicon, and so on.
Ricsi, I agree with you, but I have to say that the claim of embryonic
development being a mirror of evolution has been thoroughly debunked. It
is not a valid argument for evolution, and doesn't really need to be.
Darwin never claimed that, either. It was proposed by well-meaning,
but misguided, supporters of evolution
Evolution, natural selection, and so on, stands on its own observed
data, it doesn't need artificial support.
Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
Species" ?
Regards,
Ron (of the wooden spoon)
Ron Clarke
http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
http://tadpole.aus.as
- -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:04:06 +0000
From: "Ron Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newsletters & HTML
HI Bastian,
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:09:07 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote:
> Hi List,
> often I receive 'newsletters' by e-mail... nothing unusual.
> But sometimes those newsletters in HTML contain images and displayed in
> Arachne there appear 'red boxes'.
> Red boxes because the images are NOT present.
This happens if you read the HTML while off-line ?
> The HTML newsletter is an attachment and the images ought to be
> attachments too... but they are not there.
So they are called from the email-sender's server space.
> Since most users use M$ to handle their e-mail I suppose M$ Outlook
> users can view the images in the HTML message...
> Are the immages someway concealed into the HTML file?
No.
> Or are the images not downloaded from the provider by Arachne. If the
> latter is true than my mailbox would be some day be filled with not
> downloaded images and that is not the case.
> ??? Any explanations?
1) The HTML attachment calls the images from the email-sender's web
server. This allows the sender's server to confirm that the email
address is a live one, and that the receiver has opened the attachment.
If it was sent by a spammer, then your address has been validated as
"live" and you go onto a commercial list.
I get a lot of these.
2) Alternatively, this is not a spammer, but the sender has linked
the email HTM attachment to files on his/her own hard disk, but has
forgotten to send the graphics as well (After all, it works on HIS
machine).
I get only a few of these.
3) Or the newsletter is in digest form, and the ListServer removes all
graphical attachments before sending.
4) Or the sending email software has been poorly set up.
There may be more explanations, but I would guess that it is one of
the above.
Regards,
Ron
Ron Clarke
http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
http://tadpole.aus.as
- -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:26:34 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Facts vs. Opinion
Hi Ricsi,
UNDENIABLE means that it is impossible to deny the existence of
something.
INALIENABLE means that the possessor (in this case, the individual)
cannot be separated from the possession (the individual's rights) because
the possession comes from, and is owned by, a source which is superior to
the possessor.
The American Constitution uses it in this way ("endowed by the creator
with certain inalienable rights"), as it refers to rights given by God
which a human (as inferior to God in authority) cannot take away from the
individual.
The Constitution writers' choice of the word indicates how serious they
were about these rights, and how deliberately they were trying to prevent
future generations from losing those rights. Inalienable means that not
even the possessor has the ability to refuse their own rights. Under the
American Constitution, an individual cannot give up (or refuse)
inalienable rights. To do so exceeds our authority.
This is the core of our 'great debates' over certain modern issues
(including abortion, euthanasia, and even animal rights). Is one right
superior to another (such a life or the pursuit of happiness)? Do those
(inalienable) rights come from God or, if there is no God, at what point
in evolution did humans gain *inalienable rights*? Or, do all animals
also have *inalienable rights*? And what about the plants?
What a confusing world. Just when I thought I had it all figured out,
along comes the UN and gives equal rights to all people (including
oppressors and their victims - alike).
PS - As for Article 5
Why did the UN decide that the people of southern Sudan have less-equal
and more-alienable rights than their ethnic-minority counterparts in
Kosovo?
The UN may proclaim the equal rights of nations large and small, but it
seems that a lot of the people in this world are not reaping the benefits
of being a "member of the human family". It almost seems as if the UN is
part of the problem and not part of the solution.
That may be FACT or OPINION, but the word that comes to my mind is ...
UNDENIABLE.
Maybe you were correct in your original choice of words.
Bob
- ---
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:55:53 +0100 (CET) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard
Menedetter) writes:
> Hi Steve!
>
> 21 Jan 2003, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> < snip, snip >
>
> S> I can not find it in my copy of the UN Charter. Please
> S> enlighten me as to which section and paragraph of the UN
> S> Charter recognizes "undeniable rights."
>
> Indirectly in the preamble:
> "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and
> worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and
> women and of nations large and small"
>
> Which refers (among other points) to:
>
> "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal
> and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is
> the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world"
>
> I (as not being a native speaker) thought that inalienable
> and undeniable were roughly the same, but anyways I
> meant inalienable.
>
> PS: as for Guantanamo:
> Art. 5
> "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
> degrading treatment or punishment."
>
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:18:42 -0400
From: "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Carbon14 testing and Arachne
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:53:17 +0000, Ron Clarke asked:
> Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
> Species" ?
No. In fact, my copy is currently in the loo library, being read in
small amounts as time allows. <G>
l.d.
- -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:20:00 +0000
From: "Ron Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Carbon14 testing and Arachne
Hi L.D.,
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:18:42 -0400, L.D. Best wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:53:17 +0000, Ron Clarke asked:
>> Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
>> Species" ?
> No. In fact, my copy is currently in the loo library, being read in
> small amounts as time allows. <G>
:)
Yes, it is a very dry read, I must admit. Not easy to take in large
doses, he was trying so hard to explain what he was thinking, and why, to
people who would not understand, or even want to believe.
Times haven't changed much in that. :(
Regards,
Ron
Ron Clarke
http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
http://tadpole.aus.as
- -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:06:52 -0500
From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Not unfair, just outdated?...[was Re: Legal Logic???
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:23:38 -0400, L.D. Best wrote:
> I find it interesting that you had no response whatsoever to all the
> historical and modern reasons for declaring a legal father, nor for the
> reasons why other options were not -- and still are not always --
> viable.
I found the historical background which you wrote about very
interesting. You have explained very well why in olden times it made
sense to consider the husband as the legal father. Things have long
since changed and it is now very easy for modern medical technology
to positively determine paternity. I don't think it fair to make the
husband to pay child support when he is not the party responsible for
siring the child.
> Instead you pick out two sentences and claim they make me
> "anti-husband."
> That type of response would appear to make YOU "anti-responsible,"
> anti-children...
I am not anti-children. I say that children should be well provided
for and cared for, preferably by their parents if the parents are able.
If their parents are not able, then society must pick up the tab for
their care and for their support.
> Your solution -- "taxpayers should pick up the tab" -- is no longer
> an option with welfare reform.
It never has been an OPTION. It has always been MANDATORY for either
the taxpayers or charitable organizations to pick up the tab for
supporting the children of indigent parents. If the taxpayers and the
charitable organizations should not care for the children of indigent
parents, then who should? Welfare reform is needed only to stop people
from scamming the system by falsely claiming that they have little or
no income or assets and that they can't get a job.
> Despite your wistfull thinking, most
> citizens DO NOT AGREE that it is society's job to care for children who
> have no other recourse.
Most citizens DO AGREE that it is society's job to care for them.
Should we just turn them out to freeze and starve to death?
> The powers that be these days would rather remove the children from the
> mother who could not care for them, and sell them on the adoption market
> .... [oops, fees aren't "sales price," right?]
If the mother's difficulties in caring for her children are only
financial in nature, then the powers that be will just want to give
her whatever money she needs. They are not going to take the children
away from the mother unless they find that she is an "unfit mother".
The mere lack of money does not render a woman unfit to care for her
children. If that is the only problem with the poor woman, then that
is a problem that can easily be cured by a simple welfare handout.
Sam Heywood
- --
This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser:
http://browser.arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 03:27:52 -0500
From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Carbon14 testing and Arachne
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:20:00 +0000, Ron Clarke wrote:
> Hi L.D.,
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:18:42 -0400, L.D. Best wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:53:17 +0000, Ron Clarke asked:
>>> Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
>>> Species" ?
>> No. In fact, my copy is currently in the loo library, being read in
>> small amounts as time allows. <G>
> :)
> Yes, it is a very dry read, I must admit. Not easy to take in large
> doses, he was trying so hard to explain what he was thinking, and why, to
> people who would not understand, or even want to believe.
> Times haven't changed much in that. :(
For a very good read, and for a swash-buckling high adventure story and
a true tale of derring-do, you should read "The Voyage of the H.M.S.
Beagle", also by Charles Darwin. This is one of the most fascinating
books I have ever read.
Sam Heywood
- --
This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser:
http://browser.arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:16:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Binky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Do you want to unsubscribe ?
On Tuesday, 1/21/03 at 15:06:48 -0400,
"Clarence Verge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have been given permission to collect the email
>address of all those who want off this list and
>manually delete their names from a copy of the
>subscriber list. Michael will then attempt to
>overwrite - he says it may not be as easy as it
>sounds - the existing list with the new version.
>
>If you want off, send an email to:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>from the address you wish deleted before this
>weekend.
>
>Don't send your request to the list.
If it would be easier, another possibility
would be to delete the entire lists for arachne
and arachne-digest and send an e-mail to everyone
on both lists instructing them to re-subscribe to
whichever list they want to receive.
Binky
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:58:49
From: Alejandro Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Carbon14 testing and Arachne
On 22 Jan 03 at 9:53, Ron Clarke wrote:
>
> Am I the only one who actually owns a copy of "On the Origin of
> Species" ?
>
>
> Regards,
> Ron (of the wooden spoon)
>
I have uploaded the complete text copy of:
"The Voyage of the Beagle by Charles Darwin" at:
www.limasa.com.ar/beagle.zip
This is a really interesting book, where everything begun.
Free good Sans Serif fonts for MS-DOS at:
www.limasa.com.ar/novafont.zip
Configurable dialing menu for several DOS internet programs at:
www.limasa.com.ar/dial_ip.zip
- ----------------------
Ing. Alejandro Lieber
Rosario Argentina
lima[at]citynet.net.ar
- ----------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 05:55:18 -0500
From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Iraq vs. N Korea
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:23:32 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
> Hi Samuel!
> 17 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> [Cultureal differences]
>>> Some minor points ...
>>> I did not mean to include the charta word by word.
>>> It would be enough to include the most vital things.
>>> Like that _every_ human being has indeniable rights.
> SH> The US Declaration of Independence says something very similar . . .
> SH> "That all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
> SH> rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
> SH> happiness."
> How does this go together with people in Guantanamo ?
> They are treated worse than animals.
The illegal combatants detained in Guantanomo ought not to be treated
any worse than any other ordinary criminals. All criminals ought to be
treated equally and according to the risks of their possible escape.
The detainees in Guantanamo do not however deserve to be treated as well
as we would treat POW's because the illegal combatants have a criminal
classification, status, and category.
>>> IMO american social/health system is total crap.
> SH> Bush fixed that problem yesterday.
> This problem is sooooooooooo HUGE that you can't "fix" it simply.
> But hopefully he imporved the situation.
> SH> Bush in his speech called for legislation to correct this problem.
> SH> Among other measures he proposes, he is seeking a reasonable max on
> SH> the awards that can be given for medical malpractice suits.
> The question is how can that happened the first place.
I don't know. There appears to be something fundamenatally wrong with
the jury selection process, especially for civil lawsuit trials. It
seems that many jurors think it is OK to award the plaintiffs huge
amounts of money just because the defendant is insured. There should be
nothing awarded at all unless they can honestly find that the defendant
is at fault. The ability of the defendant's insurers to pay for the
awards should not be a factor in their decisions.
> Some examples:
> Person buys coffee at McDonalds.
> Person spills coffee over hand ... person sues McDonalds because they did not
> tell her that the coffee is hot.
> No problem until now ... BUT
> Person _WINS_ law suit, and gets really much $$$ for it.
> Person B buys new microwave oven.
> Person B has a cat which was out in the rain.
> Person B decides that he dries the cat in the oven.
> Cat doesn't survive.
> Person B sues microwave oven maker, and gets huge amount of $$$.
> For european thinking these cases are ridicolous.
> And judge would give the other party right.
I agree. There is something really wrong with the thinking of a lot of
our judges and juries, especially in the area of civil lawsuits.
>>> (eductation)
>>> There is no "don't agree".
>>> There are facts. If somebody teaches something wrong, you can
>>> intervene. For me this is the best system available. And it saves
>>> the children from misguided parents. In America it is possible that
>>> children grow up with the thought that black/white/purple whatever
>>> people are inferior. In Europe the child would at least hear
>>> something different in school.
> SH> The best solution for many parents is to take their children out of
> SH> public schools. If the parents tell the teachers they are teaching
> SH> things wrong the teachers won't change their ways, no matter how good
> SH> a job the parents do at proving that the teachers are wrong.
> This is not the problem of public schooling, but about bad american school
> system.
> In europe any teacher teaching not the truth will be immediately fired.
It ought to be that way here too. I am not so sure that you europeans
don't have some of the same problems with lousy teachers as we have here.
>>> For example a german family left germany, because the children were
>>> taught that there is evolution, and that the world was not created
>>> in 6 (7) days.
> SH> This is the reason why many parents take their children out of public
> SH> schools in the US.
> What ??
> That teachers teach them facts ??
The problem is that many people would rather believe in their
interpretations of religious scripture than in the logical conclusions
born out by science.
> If yes than these parents have serious problems.
Yes, they certainly do. In many other respects they might be very good
parents. We can't expect all parents to be perfect in every way. Most
people have problems in sorting out the religion vs. science problem
and in getting it all together. What works best for me in tweaking my
mind and spirit to run the way I want it might not work for somebody
else.
> SH> I don't think that is a good reason because I believe that evolution
> SH> occurs and I don't believe the world was created in 6 days.
> Believes are irrelevant for school. (facts are relevant)
> Believing is not knowing. (german proverb)
> And what you do not know has not to be taught in school.
For those reasons we do not teach religion in public schools in the US.
Another reason why we do not teach religion in public schools in the US
is that the courts want us to adhere to the constitutional principle of
separation of church and state.
> People have found millions of proofs for evolution.
> (dinosaurs which are more than a million years old [measured with C14], embrios
> which have a tale in the early development, .....................)
Yes, I know, but many people will not listen to proofs for what they
do not want to believe in. When Gallileo aligned his telescope on a
particlar night for the purpose of allowing people to see with their
own eyes how the planets revolve around the sun instead of around the
earth, many of those who believed otherwise refused to look through
his telescope. They did not want to look at the truth.
> If somebody manages to collect enough true evidence that the world was indeed
> created in 6 days, than he will get the nobel prize and his theory will be
> taught in school.
> But until than he should not speak nonsens.
What is nonsense to you and me is truth for many others. You have to be
exposed to a lot of ignorance in order to recognize that it is perceived
by many as changeless truth.
> SH> In the US parents have the right to take their children out of public
> SH> schools, even if they don't have a good reason in my opinion for doing
> SH> so.
> As I already wrote every system has pros and cons.
> But the advantages for me are much bigger than the disadvantages.
> Imagine a family where the children are taught that all black people are evil,
> and should be shot.
> And than they learn that the US const. and the UN charta says that every human
> being has undeniable rights.
> this will get them thinking, and asking.
> And THIS is a HUGE advantage for public schools.
The US Constitution is taught in almost all private schools, but neither
the public nor the private schools in the US care to teach very much
about the UN. Americans in general do not have a very high opinion of
the UN. We know that the UN aspires for some very noble ideals and some
which are not so noble. Regardless of whatever the UN aspires for, the
fact is that it has accomplished very little.
> SH> Some parents do have some good reasons in my opinion for taking
> SH> their children out of public schools.
> I wouldn't know any reason.
> But there are some reasons to change the school, eg go to another one.
>>> For me the education is a safeguard that young people get to know a
>>> diversity of oppinions.
> SH> This should be one of the main purposes of education in the US.
> But how to achieve this, if any rassist has the right to take his children out
> of school, and "teach" them himself ?
This is the drawback to allowing home schooling. There are a few parents
who home school their children who are very bad parents. When the parents
are found to be unfit, then social services will take the kids away from
them and put them in foster homes.
> SH> In most of the private schools in the US the schools seek to protect
> SH> the children from learning of any opinions and points of view that the
> SH> teaching staff thinks are wrong.
> IMO a big mistake.
> In Europe it is believed that these points are more important to learn.
> In order that wrong things do not happen again.
> Nazi regime, apartheit (S Africa) ..........
>>> SH> The UN aspires for unlimited World Government and very limited
>>> SH> world languages and cultures and religions.
>>> What is the UN.
>>> It is an organization formed by the world governments.
>>> So, no you couldn't be more wrong.
>>> Because the world's governments can never form a world government.
> SH> True, but the world's governments ATTEMPT to form a world government.
> Anyways it is important that no single government can do as it wants.
> And I don't see any better insurance for this than the UN.
> SH> Also they ATTEMPTED to establish a world language which they called
> SH> Esperanto.
> This is nonsens IMO.
> The world would loose so much cultural detail.
> And IMO english has very much made it to an international second language.
This situation might change after a few more decades. The growth rate
of the Spanish speaking populations in the world is much greater than the
rate seen in populations which speak English. Soon the Spanish speaking
people will outnumber those who speak English.
> SH> History repeated itself in the story about how the UN tried to
> SH> establish Esperanto.
> These 2 things have nothing in common.
> NOTHING.
The story of the tower of Babel is like the story of trying to establish
Esperanto. Both projects were organized attempts to establish some kind
of perceived universal ideal. The result in both cases was the further
breakdown of society into increased misunderstanding.
Sam Heywood
- --
This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser:
http://browser.arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:51:32 +0100
From: "Joerg Dietze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: War on Iraq ? (Humour)
Hi Ron and all,
ROFL!!!!
Regards Joerg
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:08:20 +0000, Ron Clarke wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I just uploaded a graphic (50 kb) I received, purporting to be the
> reason for the gathering of the clans in the middle east.
> http://tadpole.aus.as/files/reason.jpg
> Regards,
> Ron
> Ron Clarke
> http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
> http://tadpole.aus.as
> -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
- -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:54:17 +0100
From: "Joerg Dietze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newsletters & HTML
Hi folks,
this happens if the links are not correct. I receive some newsletters on
HTML base where everything works fine.
Regards Joerg
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:04:06 +0000, Ron Clarke wrote:
> HI Bastian,
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:09:07 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote:
>> Hi List,
>> often I receive 'newsletters' by e-mail... nothing unusual.
>> But sometimes those newsletters in HTML contain images and displayed in
>> Arachne there appear 'red boxes'.
>> Red boxes because the images are NOT present.
> This happens if you read the HTML while off-line ?
>> The HTML newsletter is an attachment and the images ought to be
>> attachments too... but they are not there.
> So they are called from the email-sender's server space.
>> Since most users use M$ to handle their e-mail I suppose M$ Outlook
>> users can view the images in the HTML message...
>> Are the immages someway concealed into the HTML file?
> No.
>> Or are the images not downloaded from the provider by Arachne. If the
>> latter is true than my mailbox would be some day be filled with not
>> downloaded images and that is not the case.
>> ??? Any explanations?
> 1) The HTML attachment calls the images from the email-sender's web
> server. This allows the sender's server to confirm that the email
> address is a live one, and that the receiver has opened the attachment.
> If it was sent by a spammer, then your address has been validated as
> "live" and you go onto a commercial list.
> I get a lot of these.
> 2) Alternatively, this is not a spammer, but the sender has linked
> the email HTM attachment to files on his/her own hard disk, but has
> forgotten to send the graphics as well (After all, it works on HIS
> machine).
> I get only a few of these.
> 3) Or the newsletter is in digest form, and the ListServer removes all
> graphical attachments before sending.
> 4) Or the sending email software has been poorly set up.
> There may be more explanations, but I would guess that it is one of
> the above.
> Regards,
> Ron
> Ron Clarke
> http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html
> http://tadpole.aus.as
> -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
- -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
------------------------------
End of arachne-digest V1 #2030
******************************
