On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:01:10 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 11:13:21AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> The right thing to say would be to specify what the voting system
>> will accept.
> Half way there. Now add "and mention which MUAs are known to work
> with this". Why is this so hard?
Because I have no interest, or time, to sit down and compile a
list of buggy or not buggy software, and which versions work and
which don't , and work arounds and how to send email tutorials.
If you think that is so easy, and does not take time, you do
it.
>> The developers ought to be able to figure out what software to use
>> to meet that, or to figure out if their particular MUA conforms or
>> not. This way there is no prescription of software to use from up
>> on high.
> You still misunderstand. Neither a prescription, nor a
> recommendation.
> Merely a heads-up __about known issues triggered by an
> undocumented__ change in the call for votes.
This was not a change in anything in the voting mechanism. It
just happens that something triggered some bugs out there. I don't
have time to find out what triggers what bugs in mailing software,
now, or in the future.
Not my job description, not an ithch I need to scratch, and
not work I am willing to take on. If you think this is so all fired
useful, compile the list. send mail to d-d-a.
manoj
--
I want another RE-WRITE on my CEASAR SALAD!!
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
