Re: [tlug] [Was: Why Hollywood does break foreign films ?] Changing subject in thread.

[Scott Robbins <scottro@example.com>]

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 12:14:55AM +0800, Raymond Wan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Benjamin Tayehanpour
> <benjamin@example.com> wrote:
> > no bearing on what people prefer. It makes no sense: If a person who
> > prefers plain text (with a client thus instructed) is presented with
> > plain text, and a person who prefers enriched text (again, with a
> > client thus instructed) receives enriched text, surely that leaves
> > just one type of user unhappy, namely the one who couldn't be bothered
> > to bend his or her client to his or her will?

I'm going to add one more thing before I drop out of this discussion. 
I've snipped Ray's *excellent* answer (See, one can empathize without html)

Even though it's dated, a comment from
http://www.georgedillon.com/web/netiquette.shtml is still applicable.
------

HTML e-mail is always uneconomic, sometimes unreceivable and/or unreadable
and it can occasionally be unsafe. There really is no good argument for
sending e-mail in HTML format. If you want your audience to see an HTML
formatted page, put it on your website and send them the URL. 

-----


Be considerate of the recepient's time and bandwidth.  


-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6