At Tue, 23 Apr 2002 17:01:16 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Anand Kumria">
> > - you mention removing PGP/GPG signatures. Why? I see many complaints
> > about HTML formatted email but I've never seen any about signed email.
> 
> They barf up quite a few mail programs, make things harder to read, etc.
> They're not complained about because it would be uncool to diss signatures,
> whereas posting in remarkably unmodern plain text is cool. [ Okay, I'm being
> sarcastic. It's late in the afternoon. ]

i don't get this.

surely signing email is a Good Thing for distributed communication,
and thus SLUG should be setting an example and *encouraging* it.

limiting email content to US-ASCII is simply not good enough for any
worldly environment. for SLUG to promote such american-centric bigotry
is inexcusable - hence SLUG /must/ promote MIME and encourage all
mailing list members to seek MIME compliant MUAs.

I see SLUG's place as providing a "best practice" example of how
things Should Be Done. IMO, MIME and PGP are certainly a part of that.

don't punish those who do the right thing.
(aka "don't optimize for the failure case")

-- 
 - Gus

Attachment: msg22887/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to