Zsolt Antal wrote:
This is debatable. There is no fixed standard on what a "HTML message" is. A HTML document embedded into the body of the "real" message as a MIME chunk is so far the closest description I've seen. On the other hand, most users have or can get their hands on a mail client that swallows HTML messages - which is not an excuse, but HTML folks are using as a leverage for their cause.Hi,Is the following normal, accepted or simply `we must live with it'? - html post
As you can see, I'm sending in plain TEXT.
Top post as a reply to the lower quoted section is a stupidity, agreed. But if you want to make a preamble to your reply, then it can be used.- top post (ie.: reply _above_ the quoted message)
- big sigblocks (over 4-5 lines)
Only if they are funny. And I'd suggest users stick to this formula: sigBlock.NumberOfLines()*sigBlocak.HumorLevel() == SignatureBlock.FIXED_CONSTANT
Utter stupidity. I don't know how they manage to do it. Reply, erase quoted text and write their message?- original post/question as a reply to a message in an absolutelly unrelated thread
How? You'd need a moderator to police this list and evaluate every mail. For each "bad" mail, they would have to send a direct reply to the users and withstand a, usually, long reply-forth-and-back conversation with them, plus be a toll free support in teaching them how to use their clients. People on this list who are answering requests already have their hands full.Or there is no chance to explain this to the users of this list why all of the above is bad habit/technique?
(I'm not wondering when I look at the headers from the weird posts, especially at the `X-Mailer' field.)
:-)
Sorry for my english!
So far, so good. Nixie. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
