Where are those stubs..

[Remco Rijnders]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:42:33PM -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote:

>> Still with the HTML? This excerpt is from the Fedora mail list but it
>> applies to all lists:
>
>It applies to those lists which have a policy on HTML mail identical to 
>that of the Fedora mailing list.  This is not the same as "all lists."
>
>> Why? HTML is designed for web pages, not emails, and uses a lot more
>> bandwidth.
>
>This is a canard.  Given most of the bandwidth is taken up by spam, the 
>tiny fraction that you can save by shifting messages from HTML to raw 
>text is utterly insignificant.  It's a rounding error.

True to some extent. But when you are on dialup or pay by the byte 
wireless, it does make a difference when you are quickly checking your 
mail and your mailserver / ISP has good spam filtering in place.

>> Many list members actually block HTML because it is used for
>> malicious code.
>
>By that logic I should block plain text emails, based on how many 
>malicious emails I get in those formats.
>
>There are certainly reasons to avoid HTML email, but these reasons don't 
>strike me as especially persuasive.

Still, the reason the original poster sent a mail to this list is to 
solicit help. The HTML mail shows up as hardly readible on some mail 
clients. While you might argue that that's a problem for the receiver and 
not the sender, it does reduce the chances of getting a helpful reply from 
someone who'd know the answer but can't be bothered to decypher the 
unreadable HTML junk that arrived in their mailbox. The sender in that 
case is the only person suffering from their HTML-only mail.

My 4KB of wasted bandwidth worth...

Remco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110720/56f2a6df/attachment.pgp>