[NTLUG:Discuss] PlainText Vs HTML

[Jay Urish]

At 09:58 AM 11/4/2002 -0600, you wrote:


I am a purest as well. I have been around since arpanet was cool and still 
to this day fell that HTML has no place in email.

If you want HTML, go to port 80.

Damnit, leave port 25 alone!!!!!!

I also think HTML in email is a gates based evil. Him and that pile of crap 
outlook....








>So a question about the list....
>
>Does anyone (besides me) care about HTML mail on the list?
>
>The old argument was that most readers didn't support it.  Now many do,
>including the one I use.  And now, the messages are sent, on average, as
>a multipart message, MIME encoded, so even if your client doesn't
>support the HTML, it _should_ show the plain text version.  Now with
>that comes larger messages and in some cases attachments. I don't like
>either, but I am a purest and considered to be an 'Old Timer' by
>many...  Basically my stance on lists has always been no attachments and
>no HTML/RTF and keep mail as small as possible to mailing lists, since
>not everyone is broadband.  Some of us pay for bandwidth.  There is
>still the issue of embedded images and javascript and such, but should
>that be left up to the end user to deal with?
>
>I am curious how the denizens of this list feel.  We had the discussion
>before about basic rules, and I was going to put something up for
>reference.  I would like to ask people (off list) to turn off HTML, but
>if no one else cares, I am just being an ass.
>

Jay Urish
The wondering UNIXWOLF
www.unixwolf.net                AIM:jayurish