Thomas Cameron wrote:
I'm not saying it's fair, I'm certainly not saying it's better - I vastly prefer plain text for e-mail. What I am saying is that it's fact. So why is it that over 90% of the list should change their ways for the 7-8% who voluntarily choose not to handle HTML e-mail?
Cheers, Thomas
I can't believe I'm adding something again, but here I go...
VASTLY PREFER PLAIN TEXT FOR E-MAIL...
You just said it and a lot of people here think it. Like you I "DEAL" with HTML mail on a daily basis. And true, it's an unfortunate fact that HTML is the default on most mailers. To me it's bloat and completely unnecessary.
I'm also in agreeance with you - that, like I just said, we're not going to get away from it because with nearly all the recent clients, HTML is on by default (maybe that's where your 90% comes from?).
But all I'm saying is that it is not netiquette. I know you don't believe in hard and fast rules as per your previous posts (as you shouldn't), but it is simply a "Nice thing to do (tm)".
So if someone kindly asks for a poster to not use HTML, please don't begrudge them that. HTML mails are like 10x bigger, and in remote Australia dial-up, receiving something like 400 messages a day from this list...dude...trust me - she adds up...I've done the math.
In summary - I do agree with you, and I will continue to deal with it without getting upset or anything, but if someone wants to ask someone to adhere to netiquette (nicely ofcourse!!!), then they really should be allowed to.
Regards, Ed.
