Reply-to amd &%^$^ HTML crap

From: John Lawson <jpl15_at_netcom.com>
Date: Thu Feb 3 10:10:14 2000

   Hmmmm... seems to me, running Pine as I do, that the "reply to"
issue, in my particular case, breaks down to laziness on my part:
Two keystrokes to set up a reply vs. replacing the Original Sender's
name with the list name. And I'm sure I could automate it but... why?

  If I had my druthers, I'd vote for the "old" way, however it's
almost a non-issue with me, and it even provides for a little
'breathing room' right before I blast off a piquant reply that, in
the fulness of time, may or may not have been a little rash.

    NOW, FURTHERMORE:

  In all this discussion of the New Classiccmp regime... I would
like to weigh in with Allison on the issue of HTML and Binary
attachments propagated to this List.

  I belong to 6 other lists besides this one, and four have some kind
of HTML filtering and binaries-rejectors. I dislike, and delete
unread, HTML stuff, because this is an ASCII list and I engage it
with an ASCII mailreader. Yes, I have PPP accounts and Netscrape and
all the rest, but my central (and voluminous) corespondence is
carried on Pine under a Unix shell account, and I ain't changin' it.

 [I offer Kevin Murrel's post above as a non-rancorous example]

  IMHO, it does little or no good to try and 'police' the issue
case-by-case, due to the influx of new members and existing members
forgetting or not caring. Most folk here are pretty sensitive to
this, I have found, once made aware that HTML is displayed in it's
raw state for many of Us. And I think it's much prettier cooked. It
does seem to be a losing battle in the long run.
  
  If this instance of majordomo has such filters, I, for one, would
like to see them energized....


   Cheers

John
Received on Thu Feb 03 2000 - 10:10:14 GMT