hmm .. every body here seems to have a point.. a point of view .. an opinion .. probably correct too
in a group that i'm in, the HPLX PDA group, there is not only a stricture against html, but also a stricture against number of lines arup's opinion, though strongly worded, and may look a bit abrasive, is quite on the point ! in that group there are members who pay by the traffic .. they all use PDA's .. the HpLx95/100/200 which have tremendously limited capability .. and .. they use CELL PHONES attached to those PDA's triple charges ! .. YET, they are decently going about the aim of reducing no. of lines of posts from 150 lines to lesser BUT, there is a difference .. they don't have ANY flames .. the decision is not imposed .. and ALL are allowed to voice their position (NOT OPINION.. but positions) several members are wanting the line limits to be cut down drastically .. lesser lines, more relevance, quicker reading, faster replying, good contents, irrelevants absolutely missing, no 'tails' at all, no adds (senders websites, mottos, quotes), very crisp, concise, clear. all this leads to NO nonsense emails either. to them, it COSTS money to have flames. that is their situation .. and they all know it .. what is OUR situation ? let's ask .. ALL LIST MEMBERS PLEASE RESPOND (to resolve this cacophonous issue once for all) : Do you have a problem with html mail ? [ ] yes [ ] no and let's lay down this issue to rest in peace for owner, host, staunch memebers .. this does NOT mean that html will be allowed .. let's not only keep this fully text based .. but also clamp down on length of message .. those who have 'looong' things to tell .. tell them to those who want to hear .. spare the rest ! let me see how many luggers will take up this challenge .. to write in very short .. some meaningful things .. and become very narrowly focussed on the subject line this IS going to take care of wireless/bandwidth/ traffic reduction, etc. etc. all the reasons for not allowing html's time consumption for msg transfer and a request : i'm still recovering from lots of injuries by way of direct flak .. don't direct any more flak at me .. focus on the issue .. html hurts members or not html does hurt the list .. this is well known now err .. doesn't open source mean allowing all things ? ..pk (taking a small risk here .. may get muzzled on html grounds ;-D ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Arup Kanjilal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 4:50 AM Subject: Re: [ilug-cal] Ban Html mail > > --- Tathagata Banerjee > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 03:19, Raja Guha wrote: > > > > > But banning! isn't that a little heavy-handed. > > > > > > i guess not. most people on the list who have > > No it isn't. there are always 3 groups : FOR AGAINST SILENT > In fact it's standard policy on many lists. it is ! true ! but on many more it is not ! that's true too ! depends on how many members want what let's find out .. and THEN opine. flames solve nothing ! facts do .. let people tell .. and then the decision be taken NO ONE can have problems with THAT ! > To make the reason monetarily realistic, extra > junk in mail is seriously bad when users pay by data > volume transferred (which many do, hmm.. JUST HOW MANY do ? members .. please DO inform .. this is a matter of great concern .. if members ARE in fact having to 'pay by data volume transferred' .. this issue MUST be known, understood, considered, and a solution found .. that's not only fair but also proper .. so ! those who ARE paying more for longer emails .. or htmls .. PLEASE inform this list > your flat rate ISP > isn't the only ISP in the world, and your mail reader > device is not the only one out there - heard of > blackberry's and other wireless pdas?). my my .. 'your' .. 'your' .. "isn't" .. "heard of" hmm .. arup .. err .. err .. well .. i'll just say nothing .. > If you want to send a nice formatted message, use a > word processor, zip up the result, mail to folks who > are expecting it. just a small teeny weeny question here .. what if the number of members who have problem with loooong msgs or html is found out to be very small ? whose 'will' will prevail ? the larger number who are NOT having problems with looong emails/htmls .. or ..... well better left unsaid .. as my will certainly prevails not .. my requests certainly are heard not .. my suggestions certainly draw more flak than discussions i MAY even withdraw one day .. when i am fed up enough :-(( ! ..pk > > Arup > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! News - Today's headlines > http://news.yahoo.com > > -- > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body > "unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line. > FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/help/faq_list.html > -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body "unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line. FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/help/faq_list.html
