Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Andrew DeFaria <Andrew AT DeFaria DOT com>
Subject: Re: Extending long threads
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 21:53:31 -0700
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <ccnsqi$jdf$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <ccmc0r$gd4$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <E1Bj6zm-0005kz-00 AT quimby DOT gnus DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet AT sea DOT gmane DOT org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: h-67-102-25-114.lsanca54.covad.net
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.2 (Windows/20040707)
In-Reply-To: <E1Bj6zm-0005kz-00@quimby.gnus.org>

GARY VANSICKLE wrote:

>> As a person who regularly uses HTML style email and posting (much to 
>> many peoples chargrin and complaints) I rarely "fester" them with 
>> "all" sorts of colors and fonts. Other HTML emails and posts I 
>> receive are also rarely "festered" with all sorts of colors and 
>> fonts. Why? Because doing so takes time, knowledge and effort and 
>> most people simply don't take the time, have the knowledge nor can be 
>> bothered with the effort required. As such I don't think such an 
>> argument holds much water. IOW I think if people of your opinion see 
>> just one bolding they'll call it "festered with all sorts of colors 
>> and fonts".
>
> There's three reasons people knee-jerk against HTML email:
>
> 1. It isn't ASCII 

Sure it is! It is exactly ASCII. It just has tags and you just don't 
like the tags that's all.

> (i.e. the "Back in my day a child would open up a gift and within 
> seconds he'd either burst into flames or lose a limb! That's the way 
> it was and we liked it!"[1] Defense).

Not sure what this means nor how it's relevent.

> 2a. There isn't an email program alive which can do a "Reply" to an 
> HTML email properly.

Define properly. Mine works just fine. Sorry you're having problems.

> 2b. ...especially those which support VT-100 terminals.

Get a new terminal!

> 3. The lines are longer than 80 characters ;-).

Sometimes. For example this line isn't! :-)

> I fall under category 2a, but my knee isn't jerking: If Outlook didn't 
> absolutely s*ck *ss at "editing" HTML I wouldn't care.

You left off the most important reasons - it's not what you are 
accustomed to and your reading software of choice is inept.

-- 
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/