Yup. you found both the settings that can make you send HTML email in
OutLook Express. It's a shame that the Redmond boys don't set up the
defaults for good net ettiquet. But then the Netscape guys don't do
it either. Go figgure. As far as the Donnie issue, at least from
where I sat, it looked like most of the flaming was in responce to
his reaction to being told to turn off the HTML. But I hope it's
over, such a terrible wast of time and bandwidth ( I had something to
say on the subject as well as others ).
Ernie
On Mon, 18 Oct 1999, Simon Norris wrote:
> Not to worry, I found my problem.
>
> FYI, there is an option in Outlook, 'reply to messages in the format in
> which they were sent' , which when checked, inherits the original poster's
> format. Selecting the plain text option is not enough. The post I was
> replying to was HTML without my knowledge.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Simon Norris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 1999 3:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [newbie] (OT) -- About HTML
>
>
> Just a quick query, not really suited to this group, but necessary just the
> same.
>
> I have been using Outlook for some time now, and have had no problems
> sending plain text. Unfortunately, I have just sent a post to this group,
> and got a courteous comment directly to me asking for me to drop my HTML.
> All of the settings I have refer to plain text, so my question is, does
> Outlook have a mind of it's own, as most Microsoft products do? Does it
> inherit the format from the post I am replying to? The way I have Outlook is
> that there is no visible difference between plain text and HTML, so whenever
> I see someone ask for HTML to be dropped, I haven't got a clue whats going
> on!!
>
> I would like to add my assistance to this group, as they have given me lots
> of ideas for things to do and I'd like to give something back, however I
> have no intention of receiving a similar flurry of comments as Donny did,
> for sending HTML (Although he did give as good as he got!!).
>
> As far as the comments about filtering HTML, that would be useful for us
> poor sods stuck with Outlook, who don't even know whether they're sending
> plain text or HTML!!
>
> Thanks for your generous assistance.
> Simon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Mings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 1999 2:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [newbie] (OT) -- About HTML
>
>
> >Based on the number of "remove" requests posted to the list, the
> >actual number of people who actually *READ* the welcome message is
> >probably quite small. Thus, the chances of the "Nettiquette" tutorial
> >having any effect is negligible. However, if it saved us ONE post in
> >HTML, I suppose it'd be worth it, and it wouldn't be that much
> >trouble, as it would automatically go out with the 'welcome'
> >message... just create that "nettiquette" tutorial once and it would
> >go out automatically from there. :-)
> > John
>
> There is another solution if the list owner chose to implement it.
> Although I am relatively new to linux, I have run large volumn
> discussions lists for several years. We have implemented a filter on our
> lists that rejects all attempts to send attachements to the list, and
> ALSO _rejects_ all HTML formatted email. Works great! Put the guidlines
> in the welcome message and let them figure out themselves why none of
> their postings make it to the list if they choose to ignore the
> guidlines. If they contact the list manager about it, I tell them what
> the problem is and how to fix it. FWIW I would also recommend that
> whoever is running this list take a more visible and active approach in
> dealing with list problems so that members don't feel they need to fight
> out the issues on the list that should be delt with by the list manager.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Mings Ph.D.
