I for one see a great deal of humor in it. :)
Sometimes I wonder if it's truly an issue of the precious bandwidth (which
becomes cheaper with each passing month) or the fact that HTML mail seems to
be most prevalent among e-mail clients like Outlook, which is a product of
that evil empire in the northwest woods. So naturally, we associate HTML
mail with evil and, like one Tomas de Torquemada, seek to stamp it out
wherever we may find it. Our position is morally superior, HTML mail is of
the devil, all who oppose us are wrong.
We have pontificated... and there will be no further discussion on the
matter.
__________________________________________________________
As a relatively new linux user, what does this thread teach me about the
installation, configuration and optimization of Red Hat Linux?
Or has this been a wasted topic, best reserved for Slashdot?
Ron Jones
Irvine, CA
In response to post-September 11th legislation:
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
> Hi
>
> I shall be brief because I dont want to be insensitive to your bandwidth
> issues. As a result of a 4 KB message posted in html and my 5 KB reply
> asking why he should not post in html there was a grand total of about
> 77 KB of complaints whos main issue is seems to be bandwidth
> conservation. Thats 19.25 times the size of the initial message in html.
> Does anyone see the humor here .
no.
and, more to the point, this issue is not going away any time soon.
as more users come to linux, many of them will be joining the red hat
mailing lists and bringing their bad habits with them, including the
monstrosity that is HTML e-mail.
in my opinion, anyone who posts to one of these lists in HTML should
be notified -- immediately and in no uncertain terms -- that that's
an unacceptable practice.
this doesn't need to take up any major mailing list bandwidth. perhaps,
instead, emailing the culprit personally with a URL reference to an
article on netiquette would suffice.
personally, i'd love to see red hat itself take a position on this,
and simply reject any postings that are clearly HTML-based, with an
automatic reply to the sender as to why. what was it kennedy said?
something about the price being "eternal vigilance", wasn't it?
it's kind of like copyright. if you don't protect it *continuously*,
you lose it. and i think the red hat mailing lists should be protected
as text-only forums, with attachments if you really need them.
rday
p.s. please don't respond to this note with any defenses of HTML
e-mail. it's bad, and you're wrong. deal with it.
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
