From: Florian D. [mailto:flockmock@...]
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1
instalation [OT- html posts]
Bob Young wrote:
>" It's pretty rare that a modern email client can't deal
> with html. I would argue that the very few desktops not using some
> flavor of GUI should not force a limiting "least common denominator"
> type policy.
yeah. lets get rid of the minorities.
I didn't suggest "getting rid" of them. I'm saying that it's true that when
email, lists, and newsgroups first started, they didn't handle formatted
text. However that seems poor justification for saying that it *must* remain
that way now and forever more. At what point do we actually allow our selves
to communicate with each other using more of the nuance and style that
current technology easily allows us?
If some wish to filter out html or KF such messages all together they are
free to do so, current technology can very easily accommodate that. I just
don't think it should be a faux pas to post in a richer format than plain
> If a few extra Kbytes here or there in
> an email message is really causing a problem for someone, then an
> upgrade should probably be priority. Most messages are much larger
> than they need to be anyway because people don't trim quotes.
this is about private emails. emails in mailing lists should be short
and concise. i wonder what the big archive-sites think about this..
What do they think about it now when people quote 100+ lines of text in
order to give a one-sentence reply?
I don't think the addition of a few tags and a bit of metadata is really a
> Lastly there are some things that are just easier to communicate in a
> html format, diagrams and tables come to mind, we've all seen ASCII
> diagrams of various things and had to stare at them trying to
> decipher what was the author actually trying to communicate. Even in
> a mostly text message, bold, italic, enlarged/reduced, or colored
> text used for emphasis or de-emphasis can make communication much
> more clear. In short I just think that there is this "knee-jerk"
> reaction to html email in the FLOSS community, and it isn't justified
> by an objective evaluation.
if you don´t like ascii graphics, then you don´t know the textmode quake
Actually I do like ASCII graphics, I just don't think it's the best method
of representing many types of information.
> Must we be constrained to communicate with each other via nothing
> more sophisticated than plain text forever and ever?
read Wittgenstein. plain text and very sophisticated.
Sophisticated content, and the sophistication level of the medium used to
deliver that content are two different things.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list