I believe this list has ban on attachments.
As for web sites, I rarely look since I find the
content is often more out of context than a dialogue on
list. An attachment is to me, a footnote which may or
may not be opened. I often do not open it if the
person has convinced me that they are doctrinaire or
predictable in their answers. I make a distinction
between repetition and predictable because repetition
can be quite surprising and interesting as the minimal
soho composers like Reich and Glass have shown.
I also find that web sites often take so much energy that
others don't converse much about their work. I don't even
give out my web site since I think it is doctrinaire and is
just plain unsuccessful. It just sits there like a lump with
a couple of innocuous graphics .
Just a thought,
Ray Evans Harrell
Christoph Reuss wrote:
> > So I would say make more and better attachments!
>
> REH, no point in argueing about this: Sending attachments to a list
> violates the official Netiquette, is a waste of bandwidth and
> clutters up the harddisks of hundreds of users, many of which
> can't decode the attachment anyway and/or don't even have a
> clue how to locate/delete the clutter from their harddisk.
>
> If someone *needs* to visualize content, then put it on a website and
> send the URL to the list.
>
> Chris
