on 11/02/05 09:29 'mark' wrote:
<snip>
Yikes, mark - what got your undies in a bundle? Just because a rather
Luddite approach to e-mail formatting is right for you, don't presume
that it is right to everyone.
Luddite means against all technology, or most advances. I've been
doing email for 15 years, and see ->no reason<- for HTML email.
Further, you seem to ignore my main complaint... unless you didn't
understand it. Look, HTML spammail frequently includes executables, or
links to sites where, if you don't have it turned off, your mailtool
will download, on the fly, a graphic (or whatever) from a site. This
is a very common means of spreading worms and viruses.
Oh, and "luddite"? I'm a Unix/Linux software developer, Unix/Linux
sysadmin, and software configuration, build and release manager (when
I'm working, not job hunting), and have been working in the field for
more than two dozen years.
Easy there. Exactly why my phrasing is "a rather Luddite approach." I'm
not calling you a Luddite, I'm simply comparing your approach toward
e-mail formatting to Luddism. Different things.
I, too, prefer to be able to include a bit of HTML formatting in
*some* e-mail messages. Sometimes, a bit of style can carry the
content's
I correspond with a lot of folks, and my wife, who's on a larger
number of mailing lists, does a lot more, and neither of us feels any
need for HTML email, and no one seems to not understand us, unless we
haven't phrased something correctly. Seriously, have you had any
trouble understanding any of my posts, where I've used what have been
'Net standards for 20+ years - the caps, the surrounded by asterisks,
etc? (And I got tired of smileys ten years ago, so I went to the
alternative <g>)
You're missing my point. You can stick with plain ASCII if you want and
you obviously intend to. However, leave the rest of us the option for
*wanting* to communicate in HTML, without branding us heretics to the cause.
And, no, I have no trouble understanding your posts. I can read in
English just fine and you write it well. However, there are those in the
world who wish a bit more than simple black text on a white background.
I have been communicating online since the mid-1980's. I recall well the
days of a CompuServe or ExecPC account running on a 300-baud modem. I
still prefer today's speed and technology, both of which allow me to
compose and read in more than just a monospaced font in black on white
(or amber on black or green on black).
intended meaning much more easily than a clumsy smiley. Also, a
number of the e-mail newsletters I receive are formatted to resemble
the Web pages that spawned them. A nice bit of brand bundling that
actually
That, I hate. Email is not a Website - you want the Website, go there!
A far better answer is, for example, the emails I get from
Truthout.org, or the way I send out story links to lists: A headline,
a paragraph, so that the recipient can decide for themselves if they
want to read more, and a link. They want the whole thing, they can go
there, and see it in all it's Web-glory.
I'm OK with *you* hating it. I'm *not* OK with you telling me what is
and is not a good idea for me. I *LIKE* HTML messages. Why can't you
allow me that simple pleasure? I've never sent you nor anyone else who
asked an HTML message.
Next you'll tell us that you have javascript, etc, enabled for your
email.... <shudder>
Please. Just because I like HTML in e-mail messages doesn't make me a
fool. Stop treating me as one.
Next you'll tell us it's wasting electrons.... <shudder> (Yes, that's a
bit of a gentle, ironic jab.)
makes the messages easier to read.
Pardon? The only thing that I find makes messages easier to read is
when someone knows how to format paragraphs (not a problem on this
list), as opposed to four or five inches on my screen of run-on
sentences. (And when I see that in a job description!)
Bold, color, italics, serifs or not - these can all be used to bring
clarity (and, admittedly, they can be used to reduce clarity, too - but
we have been discussing the concept of HTML, not well-composed vs
poorly-composed HTML - a different discussion entirely) to a message.
Please don't completely eliminate the possibility that there can be
value in appropriately using HTML in e-mail messages.
Different strokes for different folks - please give us an indication
that the concept holds at least some familiarity for you. I'm not trying
to ruin your day by forcing you to use HTML in e-mail messages, but at
least give me the option of using it if I want in my communications with
others who also do not see it as demon's spawn.
SJK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
