SPONSORED LINKS
On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 08:37:10 -0700, Randal Whittle wrote: >At 08:25 AM 4/7/98 , Peter Lewis wrote: >>The "big deal," as you put it Randy, is that the primary purpose of this >>list is to share information. To the degree that you suppress information >>by sending it in a form that's not universally accessible, you do a >>disservice to all. For that reason, you will find that it's generally >>accepted practice in newsgroups (which I would consider this list to most >>closely resemble) to send in plain text. That may not be the "coolest" >>technology, but it includes the most people. > > What you're missing Peter, is that choice is the *sender's* perogative. > > If the sender *chooses* to send it in a form that fewer people can read, >that's his choice. He should do so knowing in advance that it won't be >universally readable, but that shouldn't prevent him from sending it. > > It certainly doesn't impose the bandwidth issues that sending a binary >does, so it should not be an issue that gets anyone excited. Can't see it? > Delete it. Obviously the sender didn't care enough about you to send it >in a plain text form. It was his mistake (unless he weighed the >alternatives and felt sending with fancy formatting was necessary). > Now for me, I just don't see how hard it is to put it as a normal attachment, with an extenstion. Heck, I don't care if it's a long filename (since some of mine are paragraphs long). Just don't send in a form that others can't read, because I only have a 14.4 modem here, and I was lucky to get my mail tonight anyways (my ISP is down, and I'm writing this offline). -- Paul Khoury <pkhoury@loop.com> http://pkhoury.dyn.ml.org Sent from my ThinkPad 701CS running OS/2 Warp 4.0, Fixpack 5 There are 22 Processes with 88 Threads. This machine's uptime is 0d 3h 21m 9s 718ms.