Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: "Florian D." <flockmock@×××.at>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation [OT- html posts]
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 22:20:09
Message-Id: 4398B129.8030301@gmx.at
In Reply to: RE: [gentoo-amd64] Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation [OT- html posts] by Bob Young
1 Bob Young wrote:
2 >
3 > -----Original Message----- From: news [mailto:news@×××××××××.org]On
4 > Behalf Of Duncan Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 6:30 AM To:
5 > gentoo-amd64@l.g.o Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: gcc compile
6 > failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation
7 >
8 > Clemente Aguiar posted
9 > <6A0C419392D7BA45BD141D0BA4F253C78B26@×××××××××××××××××××××××××.pt>,
10 > excerpted below, on Thu, 08 Dec 2005 12:02:31 +0000:
11 >
12 >
13 >> How can I solve this problem?<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD
14 >> HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Mensagem</TITLE>
15 >
16 >
17 > First, please turn off HTML. Many on FLOSS (Free, Libre, and Open
18 > Source Software) type lists consider HTML posts the mark of spammers
19 > and malware authors, and may kill filter it or simply refuse to
20 > reply. I reply, but I make it a point of asking folks to please turn
21 > it off, and may not reply (and indeed, killfile) future posts if the
22 > HTML remains.
23 >
24 > I know that many share this opinion, and although I don't want to
25 > start a flame war, I do think there are some valid counter points in
26 > favor of html. Everyone is of course free to filter content based on
27 > his or her own preferences. However most of the reasons given against
28 > posting html aren't really all that strong. In fact the only thing
29 > http://www.emailreplies.com/ suggests is that recipients "*might*
30 > only be able to receive plain text emails." It goes on to note: "Most
31 > email clients however... are able to receive HTML and rich text
32 > messages." It's pretty rare that a modern email client can't deal
33 > with html. I would argue that the very few desktops not using some
34 > flavor of GUI should not force a limiting "least common denominator"
35 > type policy.
36 yeah. lets get rid of the minorities.
37
38 >
39 > Even the two reasons listed in the above reply don't stand up very
40 > well to logical reasoning, it's obvious the OP was neither a spammer
41 > nor a malware author, filtering all html email on the basis of those
42 > two reasons alone is akin to throwing out the baby with the bath
43 > water.
44 >
45 > The other common reason given against html is storage space/bandwidth
46 > issues. This is a weak argument also; in cost per megabyte storage
47 > is dirt-cheap. Premium NNTP providers are advertising retention times
48 > of 90 days or more for large *binary* groups, where a single post can
49 > be several hundred megabytes. If a few extra Kbytes here or there in
50 > an email message is really causing a problem for someone, then an
51 > upgrade should probably be priority. Most messages are much larger
52 > than they need to be anyway because people don't trim quotes.
53 this is about private emails. emails in mailing lists should be short
54 and concise. i wonder what the big archive-sites think about this..
55 >
56 > Lastly there are some things that are just easier to communicate in a
57 > html format, diagrams and tables come to mind, we've all seen ASCII
58 > diagrams of various things and had to stare at them trying to
59 > decipher what was the author actually trying to communicate. Even in
60 > a mostly text message, bold, italic, enlarged/reduced, or colored
61 > text used for emphasis or de-emphasis can make communication much
62 > more clear. In short I just think that there is this "knee-jerk"
63 > reaction to html email in the FLOSS community, and it isn't justified
64 > by an objective evaluation.
65 if you don´t like ascii graphics, then you don´t know the textmode quake
66 project ;-)
67 http://webpages.mr.net/bobz/ttyquake/
68 >
69 > Must we be constrained to communicate with each other via nothing
70 > more sophisticated than plain text forever and ever?
71 read Wittgenstein. plain text and very sophisticated.
72 >
73 > Regards Bob Young
74 >
75 >
76 cheers, f
77 --
78 gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
RE: [gentoo-amd64] Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation [OT- html posts] Bob Young <BYoung@××××××××××.com>