nanog mailing list archives
Re: HTML-format postings
From: Andy Bradford <bradipo () xmission com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:19:56 -0600
Thus said "M. David Leonard" on Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:10:05 EDT:
Am I the only one who objects to HTML-formatted postings on a listserv? I thought there was a rule that postings should be in plain text. Am I mistaken?
You are not the only one who objects. Alas, it is getting harder and harder to convince people of the benefits of this. My general rule is that if it has a text/plain part along with the HTML then I might read it. If it is HTML-only without the accompanying text/plain then I simply discard the message without further wasting of time. :-) Andy -- [-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------] 8:19pm up 29 days, 22:57, 7 users, load average: 1.05, 1.11, 1.16
Current thread:
- Re: top/bottom posting [Re: HTML-format postings], (continued)
- Re: top/bottom posting [Re: HTML-format postings] Pim van Riezen (Jun 06)
- Re: top/bottom posting [Re: HTML-format postings] Todd Suiter (Jun 06)
- Re: top/bottom posting [Re: HTML-format postings] John Payne (Jun 07)
- Re: top/bottom posting [Re: HTML-format postings] Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 07)
- Re: HTML-format postings Jonas Luster (Jun 06)
- Re: HTML-format postings Todd Suiter (Jun 06)
- Re: HTML-format postings John Fraizer (Jun 06)
- Re: HTML-format postings Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 06)
- Re: HTML-format postings Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 06)