John Summerfield wrote:I can't. I was conceding the point simply to move beyond that argument as a meaningful point of discussion. If you don't concede the point, then the argument that all email should be reduced to the text only mode simply to support the 3/5 Red Hat employees who utilize Mutt or text only email clients as their reader becomes even more absurd. Without that previous assumption, the number of responses from Red Hat employees who use Mutt becomes statistically insignificant ... and there is no rational support for the previous demand that every newbie, who has the audacity to use an HTML browser, needs to be severely chastised for wasting precious bandwidth.On Wednesday 08 December 2004 19:10, A. Rick Anderson wrote: 79 messages out of over 6,000 a month. Do the math and draw your own conclusions about how the level of contribution that the folks with text-only browsers from Red Hat are making and how much effort everyone else should expend in order to facilitate the vital responses and assistance that they are providing. The point of the concession was simply to point out that either those 79 messages were absolutely vital, and nobody else could have provide the *quality* of response that they did, or to the raise the question of why there was any concern for tiny segment of the mailing list who contributed barely of the traffic 1% of the traffic. Not trying to say who was right or wrong. Just doing the math. -- A. Rick Anderson |
