On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 18:58 +0800, John Summerfield wrote: > On Tuesday 07 December 2004 18:57, Thomas Cameron wrote: > > > Yours might be but the majority of emails I receive are plain text. > > > > Do you think you are an average e-mail user? I can assure you that you > > are not. Having worked for many years in ISP and ISP-like environments, > > I can assure you that the VAST majority of e-mail traffic (I mean all > > traffic, not on this list or power users like you) is HTML. > > Really, we're discussing _this list_. OK, then, as I said earlier - even if this list were to triple in size from HTML, we're still talking about 45MB transfer per month. Heck - let's say it increases ten-fold to 150MB/month. I say again - "big deal." The costs associated on Red Hat's end for mail services are *trivial* compared to their costs for all the ISO downloads they pay for. The cost on an end-user's side is also *trivial* compared to downloading and storing the ISO images or running yum. The claim that HTML mail is some horrible drain on resources simply doesn't bear up. Maybe in the 80's when disk space was insanely expensive, but not today. I prefer plain text - don't get me wrong. But the self-aggrandizing newbie-bashing that I see over HTML e-mail is unjustified. It's just silly. Thomas
