[Hudlug] Plain Text emails

Fri Aug 22 14:42:29 2003

Do you ever get the feeling that a small "disagreement" has been blown
out of all proportion...

Is it Friday by any chance?

RB

-----Original Message-----
From: hudlug-admin@mailman.lug.org.uk
[mailto:hudlug-admin@mailman.lug.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ben Fowler
Sent: 22 August 2003 14:31
To: hudlug@mailman.lug.org.uk
Subject: RE: [Hudlug] Plain Text emails

>From: "Ross Brown" <ross@FL42.com>
>Whilst I agree with the basis of your argument, it doesn't work in the 
>real world: in the real world people don't use Thunderbird (cause I 
>don't particularly want my old mum beta testing software), have no idea

>what a rendering engine is and use the copy of Outlook Express their 
>Windows box came bundled with.

I may be wrong, as I suspect that MS name their products in order
confuse outsiders like me, but I believe that Outlook Express is not a
e-mail client in an RFC822 sense, but a TNEF or Microsoft Message
client. I was also under the impression that OE had to be paid for now,
by purchasing office. I have yet to meet a old Mum or average Joe who
did not steal their Microsoft software; as I say, I may be wrong.

I cannot seriously recommend it for interoperation with e-mail.

<URL: http://www.gpc.edu/~jbenson/resource/winmail.htm >
<URL: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/macoe-talk@lists.letterrip.com/msg00059.html
>

> > I am not sure how the term "average Joe" helps us.
>
>Because it makes the point that, unlike the experts on this list, the 
>average person likes to send and receive email that "looks nice".

/* On Charter */

We're not experts. At least I'm not. We are people who have in common
none or more of the following:

1. Live in or near Huddersfield
2. Like to visit Huddersfield
3. Can find the H. o S. without (much) assistance
4. Posess none or more T shirts with pictures of animals on them 5.
Enjoy meeting similar people for relaxation. 6. Perhaps something else -
check the website

/* Flame bait */

You will find more experts on the WYLUG list, and for that matter at the
WYLUG meetings.

> > Please understand that unless there is a silent majority that I am 
> > unaware of, a preference  for
> >
> >   No spam at all
> >   No viruses at all
> >   plain text only
> >
> > is more or less universal amongst people who read e-mail.
>
>Ignoring some strange logic which says that HTML email is up there with

>spam and viruses as a "problem", ...

... That is what what my reseach today on Google found ...

>... I think you'll find your basic premise is wrong.

I think that it is right.

>People who read email, in the majority of cases, want to receive 
>information.

Yes.

>If that information is made more-easily digestible
>because it "looks nice"

No: "If that information is obscured by extraneous
WYSIAYG style titivating, then recipients will be loathe
to dig for whatever it might contain"

>then they'll be a damn sight happier about
>things.

This argument was dissected by the late Rev.Thouless
who morphed (Straight and Crooked Thinking):

"Virtue flourishes when nourished by war's red fertilizer"
into
"Virtue perishes when poisoned with war's red weedkiller"

I don't have a copy to hand, but I think that this is his case 1 of 38
types of crooked argumentation

<URL: http://www.246.dk/38tricks.html >

>Clinging on to a belief that only plain text email should ever be 
>allowed, is similar thinking to that which says that we were all doing 
>fine with command lines and why, oh, why did someone invent the GUI ...

No. You are "extending my argument" (Crookedness of type 4).

Getting back to the point (Crookedness of type 6), plain text email,
RFC822 e-mail, should be preferred because that is what email clients
prefer, and that is what most recipients prefer and all recipients can
handle. I believe (but this is not part of my case) that the list
software for HUDLUG is less efficient with HTML mail.

Getting back to my old Mum (who very nearly shares a birthday with the
Queen); she uses Eudora which is a plain text compliant client, often
singled out for its geek friendly qualities. Arguably, bringing old Mums
into this is another irrelevance (crookedness of type 6).

>... - it only eats up processing power and means you've got to get a 
>more powerful machine.

That fact is true, if you are talking about servers. Brigning it up here
it is (amongst others) crookedness of type 29.

FWIW, I am a very strong beleiver in GUIs, and I and my old Mum have for
the past 14 years used Apple's Macintosh computers for this very reason.

If the GUI of the e-mail claint is more important to you than anything
else, I recommend KMail and Balsa. I suspect that Thunderbird comes into
this category also, but you have rejected this on the grounds that it is
not ready. I don't honestly see how you can at the same time claim that
Outlook Express is, ready unless your main purpose in using e-mail is
spreading viruses, but I don't advance this point as it is possibly
crookedness of types 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and of course 35. Even so, please see
that I can claim that the mote in my eye is not stopping me seeing the
beam in yours!

>I've been sending emails for more than 12 years,

Crookedness of type 23

>and I know all the reasons why things work "better" with plain text 
>emails
>-

Crookedness of type 26

>but I also live in the real world. If the Internet is to be used by 
>"non-techies"

I really don't mind whether the Internet (which is not the same as
RFC822 e-mail, though I expect you knew that) is used by non-techies or
not; I would prefer that non-techies used one of the BSD based systems
such as the Mac OS X
<URL: http://www.apple.com/imac/ >

>... then it has to appeal to them aesthetically

Surely you don't believe that the iMac has no
aesthetic appeal.

<URL: http://www.machardware-kc.com/apple.products/hardware/Displays/ >
<URL: http://www.tristatepdma.org/designing_article.htm >
<URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2959278.stm >

>(it's why  Linux has yet to *really* take off on the desktop cause it's
>still a bit
>clunky), and that means "looking nice."

I'm not with you, and I suspect crookedness of types 3,4,7 and now 12.

Linux took off on the desktop about 3 to 4 years ago, and is nearly
universal in some places.

If you really think that RFC822 email has had its day, and even those
that want to, should not be able to send/receive it, please do the Tim
Berners-Lee thing, write your own RFC and sample servers and clients,
then watch it take off (see above above about Microsoft's attempt to do
that).

If I am not in your kill file, please have the last word, and by all
means continue to send out HTML mail, even to people whom you have no
reason to believe would welcome it.

Ben.

_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile

_______________________________________________
Hudlug mailing list - next meeting: 2 Sep 2003 2000 HOS
Hudlug@mailman.lug.org.uk  Questions to: hudlug-owner@mailman.lug.org.uk
http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hudlug