At 03:30 PM 11/1/00, Alan S. Harrell wrote:
>the subscribers would continue to happily and merrily send
>email using HTML, both on my lists and all over the Internet
That's "what is".
>my goal is to teach them NOT to use HTML with email
That's "what should be", in your reality. I'm afraid the global
reality is different, but either way many people don't want to
be "taught", and will simply stop posting or leave the list.
I'm not criticizing your point of view, mine used to be the same.
I figured it took less time in the long run to teach every Outlook
user how to turn off text formatting than it did to send majordomo
commands for them. I was wrong, because many of them NEVER learned.
>Listowners who have apprenticed under me know the value of
>keeping a discussion mailing list "text only," and follow in step to
>this doctrine. ASCII text is the only egalitarian method we have for
>email and that is paramount for free and unencumbered discussion in
>mailing lists.
That's not the question. The question is whether you can allow some
people to post one way and some to post another, while DISTRIBUTING
only plain text. Who cares what mail tool they use to send it?
Who cares whether that mail tool sticks in stuff if you can easily
remove it? Is it a vendetta against HTML, or are you really just
trying to keep your list output clean?
In the end, I chose to enable them rather than disable people, and
my overall workload has dropped dramatically. No more command
parser errors to explain. No more adding and removing people who
can't configure their mail tool. That's what is.
SRE
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.climber.org/eckert/
Info on peak climbing email lists mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world:
the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw
