[Mailman-Users] text-only versus graphical

[Brad Knowles]

At 3:54 PM -0800 11/20/06, Daevid Vincent wrote:

>  Agreed. However the statements were about users who have purposely
>  subscribed to a list. And should that list send in HTML or plaintext. My
>  point being that in that case, HTML is fine because the reader WANTS to read
>  what you've sent them, and (at least in my opinion) prefers to have a nice
>  page layout than just courier font text.

The reader didn't necessarily know that the list would be sending out 
HTML, so that's not a valid assumption.

And, as LuKreme said, most people are physically incapable of doing 
good web page design, and what they turn out is the most vile crap 
that has ever had the misfortune of seeing the light of day.  I would 
much prefer to see some plain text with some real content, as opposed 
to a mountain-load of content-free crap that someone threw together 
because they thought they'd baffle me with bullshit, since they 
clearly couldn't dazzle me with brilliance.

>  This is why God invented procmailrc files... Sort your mail at the server
>  into folders and you're winning half the battle.

Yeah, but procmail doesn't help you deal with the stupidity on the 
part of the sender, and how that is reflected in the content of the 
message that you are sent.

It's smart, but not that smart.


Well, I guess you could just /dev/null all HTML messages, that would 
probably be a start.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad at shub-internet.org>

Trend Micro has announced that they will cancel the stop.mail-abuse.org
mail forwarding service as of 15 November 2006.  If you have an old
e-mail account for me at this domain, please make sure you correct that
with the current address.