SPONSORED LINKS
At 02:26 PM 4/7/98 , Harald Milz wrote: >> > For those of us using a more capable mailer (Grin!), it came through >> >perfectly fine and looked pretty darn good to boot--basically it was a web >> >page in my E-Mail. > >Go post URLs instead. I would tend to agree--it is just as easy. >Your so-called more capable mailer will interpret the >URL fine so you can go and click on it. Folks with "less capable mailers" Methinks you missed the (Grin!). >can copy & paste the URL to their favourite browser. And hey, you really >don't need to send the high volume traffic to everybody. There are people >out there who pay their ISP per volume. The choice what they suck down >their lines is up to them, not up to you. Now you've hit the peeve button: (1) If one is *so* concerned with volume in their E-mail, then one *shouldn't* be subscribing to a mailing list, where 90% of the traffic is outside of the user's interest anyway. (2) Decent mailing software--*particularly* if you pay by volume--allows you to limit the size of messages coming down the pike. The message in question *wasn't* that big (I've seen as much bandwidth consumed by text alone coming from some windbags) and if it had been, you probably could have set your software to download only the headers of any message over a certain size. You wouldn't have been "hurt" one bit. Sheesh, leave it alone. The worst thing here that happened to anyone is they saw a weird message and deleted it. There's no reason to get excited about that. ------- Randal J. Whittle whittle@usc.edu (213) 740-7775 Director, Electronic Commerce Program Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California