On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> before. Making HTML mail an option seems like a good idea, though
> there are already too many options for my taste. If someone wants to
> write that patch I'd be happy to include it.
I'd really like it because I drop all mail with any HTML par
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
reynt0 wrote:
> On Fri Dec 01, 2006, Alphax wrote:
>
>> I saw something weird where moving entries around didn't preserve the
>> order that you had put things in... I ended up writing out all the
>> option numbers on scraps of paper and shuffling th
On Fri Dec 01, 2006, Alphax wrote:
> I saw something weird where moving entries around didn't preserve the
> order that you had put things in... I ended up writing out all the
> option numbers on scraps of paper and shuffling them around until they
> were in the order I wanted :)
Similar for me m
Hi,
* Andrew Myers wrote (2006-11-29 13:21):
>CIVS originally sent text/plain emails. But it was useful to be able to
>embed links and to preserve election description formatting. The HTML it
>sends is pretty minimal -- I don't think it should set off reasonable
>spam filters.
I also picked th
Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 01:21:20PM -0500, Andrew Myers wrote:
>> I hope the election system has been working well for everyone otherwise.
>
> The system was fairly easy to use, the hardest part was deciding how the
> various entries ranked :)
>
I saw something weird wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> It certainly was enough to make my brain register it as unreadable,
> I only went back to it when Warner mentioned the deadline again.
> Looking at it now I agree it is rather minimal as far as html goes,
> but it's still not
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 01:21:20PM -0500, Andrew Myers wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> CIVS originally sent text/plain emails. But it was useful to be able to
> embed links and to preserve election description formatting. The HTML it
> sends is pretty minimal -- I don't think it should set off reasonable
Hi all,
CIVS originally sent text/plain emails. But it was useful to be able to
embed links and to preserve election description formatting. The HTML it
sends is pretty minimal -- I don't think it should set off reasonable
spam filters. At least, I haven't heard this complaint before. Making
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
And the executive summary is?
> not at Greenwich. Hey you didn't specify it was to be GMT, er, UTC
> time or any other time zone:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.gnupg.users/11076
Unless otherwise note UTC is used.
However,
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 09:41 -0700, Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
> No, I don't need an email, and yes I will vote, but not by GMT time.
> It is 4:41 PM GMT or 5:41 PM Berlin time, but only 9:41 AM here.
> Hey you set yourselves up. I cite as legal precedent a decision by
> one of the judges that wa
On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 11:52 -0600, Andrew Berg wrote:
> Joseph Oreste Bruni wrote:
> > Werner, your original ballot announcement ended up in my "Junk" box
> > accidentally by my filter. I only noticed it after a rare venture to
> > look to see what was there. Perhaps the HTML email is setting off
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Werner, your original ballot announcement ended up in my "Junk" box
> accidentally by my filter. I only noticed it after a rare venture to
> look to see what was there. Perhaps the HTML email is setting off
> people's filters?
Probably. Frankl
Joseph Oreste Bruni wrote:
> Werner, your original ballot announcement ended up in my "Junk" box
> accidentally by my filter. I only noticed it after a rare venture to
> look to see what was there. Perhaps the HTML email is setting off
> people's filters?
I don't think HTML was why, it could be bec
On Nov 29, 2006, at 7:26 AM, Adam Cripps wrote:
On 11/23/06, Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
As of now only 151 out of 1230 casted their vote.
Hurry, the deadline is next Thursday.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
I don't seem to have received the URL either - please can you
forwar
On 11/23/06, Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
As of now only 151 out of 1230 casted their vote.
Hurry, the deadline is next Thursday.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
I don't seem to have received the URL either - please can you forward it?
Adam
___
I didn't get an email either -- resend for me too please.
Simon
On 11/26/06, Allen Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I did miss the ballot page. Please resend.
On 11/23/06, Michael Jaritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Werner Koch schrieb:
>
> >this is a reminder for the logo ballot. All su
I did miss the ballot page. Please resend.
On 11/23/06, Michael Jaritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Werner Koch schrieb:
>this is a reminder for the logo ballot. All subscribers of the
>gnupg-users and gnupg-devel lists should have received a mail
>(unfortunately text/html) with an URL to the ba
Werner Koch schrieb:
>this is a reminder for the logo ballot. All subscribers of the
>gnupg-users and gnupg-devel lists should have received a mail
>(unfortunately text/html) with an URL to the ballot page. If you miss
>such a mail, please let me know and I will resend this mail.
Please resend
Hi,
this is a reminder for the logo ballot. All subscribers of the
gnupg-users and gnupg-devel lists should have received a mail
(unfortunately text/html) with an URL to the ballot page. If you miss
such a mail, please let me know and I will resend this mail.
As of now only 151 out of 1230 cast
19 matches
Mail list logo
