Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 7:17 PM, oshwm wrote: > On 22 February 2017 17:02:50 GMT+00:00, Cecilia Tanaka > wrote: >>oshwm wasn't being offensive or aggressive. He/she (I don't know > > No, i was being an arsehole :) Arseholes are primarily used

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 03:42:21PM -0500, John Newman wrote: > > > > On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Mirimir wrote: > > > >> On 02/22/2017 12:10 PM, Razer wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 02/22/2017 10:54 AM, Mirimir responds to Eugen Leitl: > It's allright, I haven't read

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 03:42:21PM -0500, John Newman wrote: > > > > On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Mirimir wrote: > > > >> On 02/22/2017 12:10 PM, Razer wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 02/22/2017 10:54 AM, Mirimir responds to Eugen Leitl: > It's allright, I haven't read anything

Re: Is email really that hard?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/22/2017 11:52 AM, Razer wrote: > > > On 02/22/2017 08:22 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 07:38:16AM -0800, Razer wrote: >>> Oh and fuck your html phobia. >> Fuck htmlphiles. Mail is text >> based. > > Listmail was

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:15:49AM -0800, Razer wrote: > > > On 02/22/2017 10:04 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > > >You're always very polite, Eugen, > > > So are Nazis when they're handing you a bar of soap and pointing you to the > 'showers'. Just remember to get warm under your grampa

Re: Is email really that hard?

Various said: > signing Is never a problem, so long as it's done according to spec so MUA's can handle it correctly. > signing means badness Signing does not dictate or modify the signed content. If your signing tool does, it's broken, go find a new one. If you author shit eqiquette to sign,

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:03:03AM -0500, Steve Kinney wrote: > LOL - don't let the door hit yez in the ass. :) > So let's see - Signing posts was not mentioned as a Good or Bad thing, > but given what list this is, signing /has/ to be at least tolerated. > That means hard wrapped text with

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 5:42 PM, John Newman wrote: > > The wonderful world we live in. Trump is not the only person who can build walls, my dear. ;) http://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/funny-kitten.jpg Ignore the trolls and be happy, my dear John. It's the

Re: Is email really that hard?

> On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Mirimir wrote: > >> On 02/22/2017 12:10 PM, Razer wrote: >> >> >> On 02/22/2017 10:54 AM, Mirimir responds to Eugen Leitl: It's allright, I haven't read anything worthwhile here in years. >>> I hope that you're exaggerating;) >>> >>

Re: Re: Is email really that hard?

Sorry, I prefer this song, Razer. It's my theme in days full of frustration, when I think if I am just wasting my time among the people. Always think I would be happier living on a very, very isolated beach, but the problem is I do absolutely hate heat, I don't eat fish, and I am an Internet and

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 10:54 AM, Mirimir responds to Eugen Leitl: It's allright, I haven't read anything worthwhile here in years. I hope that you're exaggerating;) I'm just wondering if Eugen Leitl ever contributed anything useful, or he's just a lurker/whiner who hasn't contributed anything

Fwd: Re: Is email really that hard?

hen quoted is laughable and certainly suppresses posting of context quotes. Forwarded Message Subject: Re: Is email really that hard? Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:50:46 -0500 From: Joshua Case <jwc...@gmail.com> To: Razer <g...@riseup.net> I'm subject t

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 10:10 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 02:02:50PM -0300, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017, at 5:51 AM, oshwm wrote: >>> >>> On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl wrote: >>> Who is the list owner

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017, at 3:29 PM, Razer wrote: > > He wants moderation? He should start his own list. He is a member of this list, exactly like you, Eugen, hundreds of different persons, and me. He can say what annoys him here. It doesn't mean someone will answer to him or

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Razer wrote: > > On 02/22/2017 10:04 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > >> You're always very polite, Eugen, > > So are Nazis when they're handing you a bar of soap and pointing you to the > 'showers'. > > You say you actually MODERATE lists? > > ROTF!

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:10:44 + Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > > oshwm wasn't being offensive or aggressive. He/she (I don't know > > whether is a girl or a boy, never needed to ask it) was just > > informing you - in a bit ironic way, I admit - that CP is a list > > with

Re: Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Razer <g...@riseup.net> wrote: > Forwarded Message > Subject: Re: Is email really that hard? > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:35:51 -0500 > From: Joshua Case <jwc...@gmail.com> <jwc...@gmail.com> > To: Razer &

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 10:04 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: You're always very polite, Eugen, So are Nazis when they're handing you a bar of soap and pointing you to the 'showers'. You say you actually MODERATE lists? ROTF! Which ones? Rr

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > I really made a mistake back then. This list should have never been > resurrected > in the current form. Sorry, Eugen, the list didn't ressuct because it did never die, in fact. It changed a lot, and not to a better list,

Fwd: Re: Is email really that hard?

Forwarded Message Subject:Re: Is email really that hard? Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:35:51 -0500 From: Joshua Case <jwc...@gmail.com> To: Razer <g...@riseup.net> It really isn't about "going" anywhere - you are actively filling up my m

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 09:10 AM, Eugen Leitl opined: I really made a mistake back then. This list should have never been resurrected in the current form. You're trolling for a flamewar fuckwad. Tolerance and patience will kill even the best list. Get lost Fascist. This is not the way to

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 02:02:50PM -0300, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017, at 5:51 AM, oshwm wrote: > > > > On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > > >Who is the list owner these days? If we do not get moderation going

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017, at 5:51 AM, oshwm wrote: > > On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > >Who is the list owner these days? If we do not get moderation going I'm > >out of here. > > Bye then :) Eugen, oshwm wasn't being

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 08:17 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote: Also, please don't attach large files unless unavoidable. 1.5M pic is _many_ plain text emails (hi Razer). That I can do. For expediency I often 'constrain' the image sizes instead of editing them down to size.

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 08:22 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote: On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 07:38:16AM -0800, Razer wrote: Oh and fuck your html phobia. Fuck htmlphiles. Mail is text based. Listmail was text-based back whenand were current and operational hypertext markup language That's a lng time

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 07:38:16AM -0800, Razer wrote: > Oh and fuck your html phobia. Fuck htmlphiles. Mail is text based.

Re: Is email really that hard?

Also, please don't attach large files unless unavoidable. 1.5M pic is _many_ plain text emails (hi Razer).

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 02/22/2017 07:40 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: No fair filtering. Don't tell me what the fuck to do.

Re: Is email really that hard?

Top posted! OMFG! I beg to differ about not putting spaces in links you don't want followed. List archives are suck suck sucked dry daily for un-obfucated email addresses and links by all kinds of bot-sucks. Oh and fuck your html phobia. Learn to view your emails in plain text and ignore

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 10:03:03AM -0500, Steve Kinney wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 02/22/2017 03:51 AM, oshwm wrote: > > On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl > > wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:54:34AM -0500,

Re: Is email really that hard?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/22/2017 03:51 AM, oshwm wrote: > On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:54:34AM -0500, grarpamp wrote: >>> In addition to not putting retarded spaces in links which does >>>

Re: Is email really that hard?

On 22 February 2017 08:34:43 GMT+00:00, Eugen Leitl wrote: >On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:54:34AM -0500, grarpamp wrote: >> In addition to not putting retarded spaces in links >> which does nothing useful, you can also learn to >> preserve threading on replies, which is actually

Re: Is email really that hard?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:54:34AM -0500, grarpamp wrote: > In addition to not putting retarded spaces in links > which does nothing useful, you can also learn to > preserve threading on replies, which is actually useful. > Top posting, bulk quoting, html, shortlink svcs... all bad. > wtfppl. Who

Re: Is email really that hard?

Same with failure to wrap lines.