Todd Slater wrote: >Somewhere I bookmarked pages that explained why HTML email is bad, but >I'll be darned if I can find them now. I recall getting some of them >from this list, so if you've got a page you share with folks to help >explain why HTML mail is bad, could you share it? You can respond >off-list if you like, I'll post a summary. > >Thanks, > >Todd > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? >Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com > Well, HTML mail isn't bad, per se. It is considered discourteous on mailing lists because many list members will be unable to read it with their chosen mailer.
When I receive HTML mail on my business account, which I handle with KMail with the HTML capabilities turned off, I just delete it. On these mailing lists, where there are newbies who know no better, I use an html capable client (mozilla) but I am set to transmit in plain text only. HTML mail can exploit a header bug in Outlook so that attachments are launched as soon as the mail is opened... Can you kids at home say "email worm transport"? Good, I knew you could. HTML is wasteful of bandwidth where the message is meant to be read, but is legitimate for business mailings where the message is meant to be viewed. Of course a lot of unsolicited business ads in HTML with lots of photos and animations can be very expensive for someone charged by the kb or by connection time. That is one of the reasons that SPAM Kings are considered criminals. Civileme
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
