14 Oct
2012
14 Oct
'12
2:32 a.m.
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, MikeS wrote:
From: Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net>
Oh I think we /all/ "got it", we just choose to ignore said "irony".
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, Mouse wrote:
Sorry that you also missed the irony; I thought it was obvious that I'd
probably fall off my chair if you ever agreed with one of my posts ... On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, MikeS wrote:
You are correct. It was a disagreement, and for the reasons you stated. Yup, looks nice; I'm glad you agree.
In context, I think that was a disagreement. If I receive an email appropriately and tastefully
using colour and/or
HTML then I prefer it to the limitations of chevrons, plain-text-only,
etc.; if it mattered enough to me to justify installing a reader and/or
plugin to convert plain incoming mail then I would.
But I don't tell anyone how they are "supposed to" format their email;
I'm much more interested in the content than whatever format they chose
or had to use. If there's an issue that they may be unaware of I'll ask;
otherwise if it matters I'll do what's required at my end in order to
read it.
Which I guess is why better than a decade ago we convinced Jay to
implement a filter to reject HTML emails sent to the list.