bull shit fuck you
----- Original Message ----- 
From: pksharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [ilug-cal] Ban Html mail


> 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
> 


--
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

Reply via email to