On 29 March 2007 at 21:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hmm, I am no longer seeing anything new in here. Seems like | you are whinging that the ballots are not constrained to ascii, and | your broken MUA(s) can't deal with sending something conforming to a | 10 year old RFC 2015.
And I don't care if you fix it in the MUA you maintain, or the infrastructure software. But there's a bug because of you, and _you_ ought to fix it. | > [1] Again pointing to lwn.net. I didn't try all of our available | > MUAs, but I had two fail on me, including one that worked for, hm, a | > decade? | | Man, you insist on being spoon fed. So fine, here is a | list. Find one that suits you. Geez. Took me all or 2 minutes using | google. | | http://www.bretschneidernet.de/tips/secmua.html I don't really care. I am not going to change MUA because your voting software is broken by (over-)design. But now with your third hat on, you may want to consider _documenting_ in the voting instructions which MUAs are known to work with your now-borked setup, and which one don't. As I mentioned, emacs/vm and mpack both fail. Mutt seems to work. Maybe you can extend the list based on the mails you accepted with vote. Now that would help. But that would be way too constructive. So why don't you rather send me a few more condescending emails. Oh, and don't forget the name calling. It's just not the same without it. At least your tone remain patronizing so it's good to know that there are some things we can always count on. Dirk -- Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. -- Thomas A. Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
