Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Quoting styles

[Holly Bostick]

Dale schreef:
> Alexander Skwar wrote:
>
>> Dale schrieb:
>>
>>> Well I have to have HTML because I use email for a LOT more than
>>> just this list.
>>
>> And why do you need HTML there?
>>
>> Anyway, Mozilla/Thunderbird makes it very easy to decide if HTML is
>>  used or not - when you set the default to text/plain, you hold
>> down shift while you click on the Compose, Reply, Reply All or
>> Forward button. This will then create an HTML mail.
>
>
> Because I send pictures and make my text have color and all that
> stuff. Ain't that HTML?  Ain't no list getting between me and my
> lady.  No way!


Who said anything about 'getting between you and your lady'? That's
*personal* mail, and this list, nor any other list, cares what you do in
your personal mail. But mail sent to this list is *public* mail, and
such public mail has preferences for display and use so that it can
reach the widest area of public view possible-- those who read the list
via text readers, those who read it via newsgroups (some of which do not
accept/display HTML), those who read it via webmail (and some of those
don't display HTML either, or only do so with certain browsers, which
any given person may or may not be using at that moment), those who read
the archives, those who filter it, those who thread it, those who do not
have much time and only want to read what they are interested in, and
are not going to be scrolling and trimming just to do you a favor...
don't forget, you are asking for *help from a stranger*-- that's a
"favor" in anybody's book.

Both Alexander and I have shown you how you can 'fix' mail for *this
list only*, without bothering any of your other mail, where you can, as
I said, do what you like. Nobody cares, or if they do, it's their
problem to tell you about.

But if you want us to help you, for free, out of the kindness of our
hearts, it's not only polite to consider our relatively mild and minor
conditions, but worse, it's *impolite* to reject them so violently.

Getting on the bad side of those you want aid and succor from is
simply.... dim, in strategic terms. Strategically, as the person who
needs help, you want to make it as easy as possible for as many people
as possible to read *and understand* your mail, so that they can answer
your question. And yes, that means plain-text to reduce irrelevant data
and bandwidth; it means appropriately trimming, to reduce wasted time;
it means proper subjects and not hijacking threads.

You are of course free to ignore these mild conditions, but you may well
find that your question goes unanswered, because the people who could
answer it could not or would not read your post (they couldn't
understand it because it was in the middle of a mixed top- and bottom-
posted thread; it was in HTML and they use mutt; it was a
hijack-by-subject name of a thread they had filtered so they never saw
it; you are now on their 'ignore' list because you're snarking so
severely over something so stupid, and they don't read any of your posts).

I myself prefer success (getting my question answered) to the 'moral
high ground' of "doing things the way I want them within a community
setting and be damned to the rest of you", but if you prefer it the
other way around, that is your right, and you can have the consequences
as well, for all of me.

But, whatever. I'm really out of this. It's too ridiculous.

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list