Maybe this netiquette is a little outdated. Sending a few MB to thousands of people is probably not much more than noise compared to current net traffic.
There is the IMAP protocol which overcomes the problem of modem connections, which anyhow probably only affects a very, very small amount of people nowadays, and there are plenty of mail user agents which do not have a paperclip button, e.g. mutt, pine, etc, which address the very same problem. It's is a lot easier to show a jpg-image a few kB in size than to attempt to describe what you see with words. Anyhow, the FAQ (http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#formats) the CCP4 netiquette (http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/ccp4bb.php#using) refers to explicitly allows MIME attachments, even though I also conside MIME outdated and am extremely glad I do not need to fiddle with uu-en/de-code anymore. Again: maybe it's time to update the CCP4 netiquette. Tim P.S.: I wonder how much traffic this email will induce ;-) On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 09:33:01AM -0400, Ed Pozharski wrote: > Several recent posts with decently sized attachments (now in cross eyed > stereo too!) prompt this (annual?) anti-paperclip-button rant. Lucky > for me, I can just recycle the old messages: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg11949.html > > Cheers from the self-appointed thought police, > > Ed. > > -- > "I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling." > Julian, King of Lemurs -- -- Tim Gruene Institut fuer anorganische Chemie Tammannstr. 4 D-37077 Goettingen GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
