* Martin Spott -- Saturday 12 November 2005 20:43:
Z2h0Z2Vhci1kZXZlbAo+IDJmNTg1ZWVlYTAyZTJjNzlkN2IxZDhjNDk2M2JhZTJkCj4KCgoKLS0K
PEFydGh1ci8+Ci0gaHR0cDovL3NvdXJjZWZvcmdlLm5ldC91c2Vycy9hcnRvb3JvLwotIGh0dHA6
Ly9hcnRvb3JvLmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbQo=
So, why are you posting this crap ? Please stop it,
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Martin Spott -- Saturday 12 November 2005 20:43:
Z2h0Z2Vhci1kZXZlbAo+IDJmNTg1ZWVlYTAyZTJjNzlkN2IxZDhjNDk2M2JhZTJkCj4KCgoKLS0K
PEFydGh1ci8+Ci0gaHR0cDovL3NvdXJjZWZvcmdlLm5ldC91c2Vycy9hcnRvb3JvLwotIGh0dHA6
Ly9hcnRvb3JvLmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbQo=
So, why are you posting
On 11/12/05, Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Martin Spott -- Saturday 12 November 2005 20:43:
Z2h0Z2Vhci1kZXZlbAo+IDJmNTg1ZWVlYTAyZTJjNzlkN2IxZDhjNDk2M2JhZTJkCj4KCgoKLS0K
PEFydGh1ci8+Ci0gaHR0cDovL3NvdXJjZWZvcmdlLm5ldC91c2Vycy9hcnRvb3JvLwotIGh0dHA6
Hello Melchior,
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
This is very standard base64 encoding. Every semi-decent mailer should
be able to display this. Of course, it would be better in readable
ASCII, but I wouldn't say it's crap. Your mailer *is* crap! :-P
You know as good as I do that by common practice
* Curtis L. Olson -- Saturday 12 November 2005 21:03:
Hey, what's wrong with ed /var/mail/curt ...
Hey, and what's wrong with mimencode -u and recode utf8:latin1?
As I said: it would be nicer in ASCII, but base64 isn't an offense,
unlike HTML, fullquoting, topposting, which are the real
On 11/12/05, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Melchior,
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
This is very standard base64 encoding. Every semi-decent mailer should
be able to display this. Of course, it would be better in readable
ASCII, but I wouldn't say it's crap. Your mailer *is* crap!
Yeah, oops what's wrong with topposting? ;)
On 11/12/05, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Curtis L. Olson -- Saturday 12 November 2005 21:03:
Hey, what's wrong with ed /var/mail/curt ...
Hey, and what's wrong with mimencode -u and recode utf8:latin1?
As I said: it would be nicer
* Martin Spott -- Saturday 12 November 2005 21:33:
You know as good as I do that by common practice encoded emails don't
belong into mailing lists -
Sure, just like HTML, top-posting, full-quoting, Yet it happens. I tell
people once to follow the rules, but if they don't and don't have
Martin Spott wrote:
Hello Melchior,
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
This is very standard base64 encoding. Every semi-decent mailer should
be able to display this. Of course, it would be better in readable
ASCII, but I wouldn't say it's crap. Your mailer *is* crap! :-P
You know as good as I do
On 11/12/05, Arthur Wiebe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, oops what's wrong with topposting? ;)
Ok, I'm sorry to extend a very off-topic discussion, but here I go anyway...
This one is a little lost on me. I understand why quoting whole
messages, and using HTML or
various encoding schemes can
Jeff McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 11/12/05, Arthur Wiebe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
adjustment. So what is the argument here against topposting?
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
--alex--
--
| I believe the moment is at hand when, by a paranoiac and active |
| advance of the
Jeff McBride wrote:
This one is a little lost on me. I understand why quoting whole
messages, and using HTML or
various encoding schemes can be a nuisance, but to me it is easier to
write and read replies at the top of the old message. I suppose if you
are looking back in an archive, it might
Stefan Seifert wrote:
Topposting makes only more sense, when you are too lazy to quote
selectively instead of just quoting the whole mail (probably including
signatures and ads...). And to have some context is not only nice when
reading through an archive, but also when reading a lot of mail
On Saturday 12 November 2005 21:48, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Martin Spott -- Saturday 12 November 2005 21:33:
You know as good as I do that by common practice encoded emails don't
belong into mailing lists -
Sure, just like HTML, top-posting, full-quoting, Yet it happens. I
tell people
Just a suggestion:
Maybe it is a good idea to put some of the important rules on the
http://www.flightgear.org/mail.html webpage so people can read them, before
they subscribe to the mailinglists.
Good idea, in case someone really is annoyed with top-posts/encodes etc.
Such folks are welcome
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 03:51 +0200, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
Just a suggestion:
Maybe it is a good idea to put some of the important rules on the
http://www.flightgear.org/mail.html webpage so people can read them, before
they subscribe to the mailinglists.
Good idea, in case someone
16 matches
Mail list logo
