Harry Jacobson-Beyer wrote: > I HATE html email. It takes forever to open, and the longer the email > message the longer it takes to open. I especially detest html spam email. > > So all you potential emailers out there, please don't send me html email. > > TYVM. > > Harry > > on 09/17/2002 1:36 PM, Tony LaFemina at remacs at optonline.net wrote: > > Lee Larson wrote: > > On Monday, September 16, 2002, at 11:44 AM, Nelson Helm wrote: > > The weekly digests I get are filled with repeats, (each > e-mail containing it's predecessors) and html code, which > together makes them almost incomprehensible. > > > I think daily digests are more in order. The html code is the > fault of people who use html mail when they shouldn't. (I > never use styled mail when I don't know for sure that the > receiver can handle it. Plain text is appropriate 99% of the > time.) > --- > Lee Larson, Mathematics Department, University of Louisville > Phone: 502.852.6826 FAX: 502.852.7132 > > Your reaction to this HTML thing in e-mail sounds synonymous with > the movie Pleasantville, which is currently being shown on cable. > I personally think it should be left up to the sender of the > e-mail on how they want to format it. Both Netscape and Outlook > Express are free downloads and recognize both plain text and HTML. > If anyone has a mail program that can't read HTML, then let them > download one of these if they want. > > I remember a while back when frames were first introduced to the > internet. I would go to some address and a page would open, > declaring that if my browser couldn't handle frames, I couldn't > visit their web site. I thought that was odd. I was under the > impression that the whole idea of putting up a web site was to get > as many people to visit and see what was there. Anyway, my > reaction was "I didn't want to see your stupid web site anyway!" > and went on my way. (That's one reason why I still use simple HTML > code for my web site). I was working with frames in ClarisWorks v2 > long before it was introduced to the internet, but these people > made it sound like it was a revolutionary new concept in desktop > computing. > > If you're referring to those e-mails that show all the HTML > coding, and you have to read between the lines to decipher it, I > think that's because the people that sent those e-mails didn't > know what they were doing. A good rule to follow is, if you're > experimenting with e-mail, send it to yourself first. > > > > Harry, > > It sounds like you have two ways to go with this. You can hunt them down like the dirty dogs they are, and have them shot, or like the old saying goes, "If you can't beat them, join them."
Seriously though! For those of you who don't like HTML in their e-mail. Would you rather copy and paste a web address rather than click it? Or in the case of an e-mail address, would you rather copy an e-mail address from the e-mail, open your mail program, click the button for new mail, then paste it into the To box, and then continue with typing your reply, or clicking the e-mail address in the e-mail you received and letting the link do everything else. It seems you might be confusing HTML with graphics. I find that annoying too. I think progress is in the other direction. Nobody said it was all going to be peaches and cream! Give it time. Something new is just around the corner. -- Tony LaFemina Major in Spreadsheet Layout & Design Techniques Minor in Software Fundamentals http://hometown.aol.com/visitmacland/index.html remacs at optonline.net <mailto:remacs at optonline.net> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.math.louisville.edu/pipermail/macgroup/attachments/20020917/d6aeb7f8/attachment.html
