On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:44:35PM -0600, Jim Graham wrote:
> If you keep track, you'll probably find, as I have, that HTML-only
> e-mail is between 99% to 100% spam.
HTML email is sent exclusively by three groups of people:
1. Ignorant newbies
2. Ineducable morons
3. Spammers
There are no excep
Changing the subject so this (hopefully) doesn't restart the endless
thread.
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:27:42AM -0500, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:44:35PM -0600, Jim Graham wrote:
> > If you keep track, you'll probably find, as I have, that HTML-only
> > e-mail is between
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:27:42AM -0500, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:44:35PM -0600, Jim Graham wrote:
> > If you keep track, you'll probably find, as I have, that HTML-only
> > e-mail is between 99% to 100% spam.
>
> HTML email is sent exclusively by three groups of people:
Now just a cotton picking minute...
> HTML email is sent exclusively by three groups of people:
>
> 1. Ignorant newbies
> 2. Ineducable morons
> 3. Spammers
>
> There are no exceptions. It thus, to Jim's point, an excellent
> anti-spam/anti-stupidity technique to refuse all such traffic
> at t
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 02:33:56PM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
> What about clients that you are doing support for?
That's so easy to handle, I'm surprised to see it asked (at least,
if you're using procmail). You create two (or more) rc files for
procmail. For example, I have a setup that look
* Dale A. Raby [12-10-12 08:33]:
...
> I appologize ahead of time for this rant, but you see, I know what a DOS
> window is and I guess I'm getting ornery in my old age.
or cp/m and audio tape storage.
and *ignorance* |= stupid
but lacking in knowledge and perhaps *only* of a particular su
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:59:55AM -0600, David Young wrote:
> One reason email software is not more useful is that because too many
> smart people wage a losing war on the new, foreign ways of email instead
> of programming filters that transform top-posted, red, 5000-column
> emails to the style
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 07:30:14AM -0600, Dale A. Raby wrote:
> Ignorant newbies may at some point become the Michael Elkins of the
> future.
They may. And that would be an entirely good thing, for them and
for all of us.
But that doesn't preclude the fact that they're ignorant newbies *today*.
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:27:35AM -0600, Jim Graham wrote:
> Changing the subject so this (hopefully) doesn't restart the endless
> thread.
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 06:27:42AM -0500, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 06:44:35PM -0600, Jim Graham wrote:
> > > If you keep trac
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 02:33:56PM +0200, Nikola Petrov wrote:
>
> The fact that I don't know how the engine of my car works doesn't make
> me a newbie. That's what abstractions in our world are for.
Umm, in the "car world" yes you'd be a newbie. Don't consider it a
derogatory term. We are all ne
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 07:30:14AM -0600, Dale A. Raby wrote:
>
> Not all of us are IT professionals. Some of us are blacksmiths, gun
> salesmen, truck drivers, and even ecdysiasts.
Please don't group "IT professionals." and
standards/ettiquette/netiquette as one.
> "No exceptions"? Really?
11 matches
Mail list logo
