Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:01:22 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: "George M. Ellenburg" <gme@inspace.net> Cc: bradm@gem.co.za, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Web Page Restrictions Message-ID: <19971126090122.22481@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <01bcf9bd$42e6fa20$f828cccf@caffeine>; from George M. Ellenburg on Tue, Nov 25, 1997 at 11:14:52AM -0500 References: <01bcf9bd$42e6fa20$f828cccf@caffeine>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I suppose I should first apologize for sending the first two messages
to the mailing list. I hadn't intended to. The first was an
accident, in the second I hadn't noticed that Wu Jie had deliberately
copied the list on his reply. Having said that, I think there's
something to comment on here.
On Tue, Nov 25, 1997 at 11:14:52AM -0500, George M. Ellenburg wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bradm@gem.co.za <bradm@gem.co.za>
> To: isp@freebsd.org <isp@freebsd.org>
> Date: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 7:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Web Page Restrictions
>
>
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, Rick Morel wrote:
>>>> Perhaps it's _your_ email client that's "broken", as you say, in that it
>>>> can't handle the various styles of others? Ever think of that, A-hole? Or is
>>>> only what you use the best?
>>>
>>> If you bother to check the X-Mailer header on the messages containing
>>> *answers*, you will probably find that most of them are text based.
>>>
>>> You want to cut that segment of the population out of your support
>>> stream? Fine with me.
>>
>> I guess the "new" generation all use Microsoft products anyways... why
>> are they on this mailing list if they are?
>
>
> Excuse me...
I find it difficult to excuse this illegible stuff. You *can*
configure Outlook to adhere to the RFCs, though it's obviously
difficult. I've reformatted this so that I can read it.
> Some of us are on this mailing list because we are all ISP's or we
work for ISP's. Maybe our servers are FreeBSD/ Linux/ SCO based -
but it's a dog-eat-dog world out there. Out workstations are Win95
or WinNT.
OK, I sympathize. But what does this have to do with anything? I'm
not saying "change your mailer", though it appears that there are
better mailers than Outlook.
> It's impossible for me to send a letter, which has been formatted
with one of the Unix postscript and non postscript tfu's and expect
a colleague at the other end of the hall to be able to work with it.
Again, you don't *have* to change. Are you saying that your
colleagues can't read standard mail?
> The fact of the matter is, I have to use M$ Word or Wordperfect (or
Lotus Word Pro). Typically I use MS Word, plainly because it's a
decent word processing program.
I think we could agree to disagree on that point. Again, what's the point.
> It's not right for anyone to continue on and degrade another
individual for their choice of E-Mail software. Take a step back
... isn't that a little petty?
I'm not complaining about his choice. I'm complaining about what he
expects me to read. That goes for you, too. In addtiion, in many
cases people don't even know that the mailer is mangling their mail,
and I've had many thanks for drawing the problem to people's
attention.
> Greg, I hate to point this out to you - but it's your choice to use
Mutt as your E-Mail client ever so much that it's my choice to use
Outlook Express (or Eudora Pro). You could always use Pine, you
know. There's a wondrous key combonation called ^J which will add
the appropriate line breaks and rejustify a paragraph (in Pine).
In fact, mutt doesn't do too badly with badly formatted text. But I
don't have time to read it if it's badly formatted. That goes both
for one line per paragraph and alternate long and short lines.
Apart from the obvious impoliteness of sending badly formatted mail,
consider what it does to your reputation. It looks very
unprofessional.
There are good reasons for requiring that mailers don't reformat
text. Consider the following, which is the text of this message in
dual columns. Yes, I don't need to do it in this particular case, but
I do occasionally send out two-column text for good reasons. Can you
read it? If not, you need to fix your mailer settings.
Greg
(two-column attachment)
- 1 -
I suppose I should first Wordperfect (or Lotus Word
apologize for sending the Pro). Typically I use MS
first two messages to the Word, plainly because it's a
mailing list. I hadn't in- decent word processing pro-
tended to. The first was an gram.
accident, in the second I
hadn't noticed that Wu Jie I think we could agree to
had deliberately copied the disagree on that point.
list on his reply. Having Again, what's the point.
said that, I think there's
something to comment on > It's not right for anyone
here. to continue on and degrade
another individual for their
I find it difficult to ex- choice of E-Mail software.
cuse this illegible stuff. Take a step back ... isn't
You *can* configure Outlook that a little petty?
to adhere to the RFCs,
though it's obviously diffi- I'm not complaining about
cult. I've reformatted this his choice. I'm complaining
so that I can read it. about what he expects me to
read. That goes for you,
> Some of us are on this too. In addtiion, in many
mailing list because we are cases people don't even know
all ISP's or we work for that the mailer is mangling
ISP's. Maybe our servers their mail, and I've had
are FreeBSD/ Linux/ SCO many thanks for drawing the
based - but it's a dog-eat- problem to people's atten-
dog world out there. Out tion.
workstations are Win95 or
WinNT. > Greg, I hate to point this
out to you - but it's your
OK, I sympathize. But what choice to use Mutt as your
does this have to do with E-Mail client ever so much
anything? I'm not saying that it's my choice to use
"change your mailer", though Outlook Express (or Eudora
it appears that there are Pro). You could always use
better mailers than Outlook. Pine, you know. There's a
wondrous key combonation
> It's impossible for me to called ^J which will add the
send a letter, which has appropriate line breaks and
been formatted with one of rejustify a paragraph (in
the Unix postscript and non Pine).
postscript tfu's and expect
a colleague at the other end In fact, mutt doesn't do too
of the hall to be able to badly with badly formatted
work with it. text. But I don't have time
to read it if it's badly
Again, you don't *have* to formatted. That goes both
change. Are you saying that for one line per paragraph
your colleagues can't read and alternate long and short
standard mail? lines.
> The fact of the matter is, Apart from the obvious impo-
I have to use M$ Word or liteness of sending badly
- 2 -
formatted mail, consider
what it does to your reputa-
tion. It looks very unpro-
fessional.
There are good reasons for
requiring that mailers don't
reformat text. Consider the
following, which is the text
of this message in dual
columns. Yes, I don't need
to do it in this particular
case, but I do occasionally
send out two-column text for
good reasons. Can you read
it? If not, you need to fix
your mailer settings.
Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971126090122.22481>