RE: scan are the worst

["Mark Hetherington" <mark.egroups@xxxxxxx>]

> Things have moved on, and just because you haven’t,
don’t
> winge when “we” want to use html because it enriches
“our”
> computing experience.

Eriches it how? By appending HTML ads to every message you send and
receive?
Increasing the size of all your emails? But with ADSL that probably doesn't
affect you. Not all of us are able to get such connections and when email
takes 20 times as long to deliver over a legacy connection due to it being
full of useless HTML overhead, it is quickly *very* pointless. It is hardly
a step forward.

I imagine you didn't choose to use HTML at all, it was just there and is
your current default.

HTML allows people to render their messages illegible by choosing a
"cool"
[sic] background picture or font to render it in making it useless even to
those with HTML capable clients.

Why should a user be discriminated against for prefering not to use HTML in
email?

This particular sub thread began when the list owner asked people to trim
the thread. Why would anyone care in this world where huge emails are of no
consequence?

> The vast majority of the connected
> world use html capable mail clients

ROFLMAO. Most Americans own guns, it doesn't mean they all use them.

Mark.


For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/