Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?)
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:21:38
Message-Id: 200801121020.10277.michaelkintzios@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?) by Hal Martin
1 On Saturday 12 January 2008, Hal Martin wrote:
2 > I'll keep that in mind when I am sending email to the list from
3 > Thunderbird. I'm also aware that many corporations block HTML mail to
4 > lower the risk of a staff member opening up an infected/laced email
5 > (generally on a Windows computer) so text emails are more advantageous
6 > in that regard.
7 >
8 > Randy, why aren't you out here making sure everyone's mom is aware of
9 > all the thread hijacking going on?
10
11 Hmm, he may be waiting for you to do it, while you're explaining to all these
12 moms out there why you may think that top-posting in this ML would be
13 considered good netiquette? BTW, I'm not condoning thread hi-jacking
14 either . . .
15
16 To Dale: have you tried setting up new addresses in the Seamonkey's Address
17 Book with <gentoo-user@l.g.o> and <gentoo-user@g.o> and for
18 each of these select to only send plain text messages?
19
20 From previous threads I remember that you can send plain text when you respond
21 to a plain text message in this ML, but not otherwise. This could be that
22 you do not have both addresses above set up to only send plain text format.
23
24 WARNING: I have not yet used Seamonkey, but vaguely remember something like
25 this in the old Mozilla/Netscape features.
26
27 HTH.
28 --
29 Regards,
30 Mick

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] HTML vs. Text messages (WAS: Is GWN dead?) Dale <dalek1967@×××××××××.net>