On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Mike & Tracy Holt wrote: > I agree with you about the HTML; I've found that some people can be > agitated by the use of it. I think it is unreasonable to suggest that just > because *some* people (for sentimental or whatever reasons) want to cling > to archaic text only mail readers, that nobody should be able to use HTML. "some" folk substitute the glitter of html for careful wording...kinda like lawyers attempting their closing arguments in rap...outa place means outa sight of many who might otherwise read one's words... frank
- Re: [newbie] Registration number Alexander Skwar
- [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on this list John Glasscock
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on this ... Mike & Tracy Holt
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on t... Alexander Skwar
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on t... Tom Brinkman
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on t... frank
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages ... Fran Parker
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML mess... Alexander Skwar
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on this ... Phil Burton
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on t... Paul
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages on t... Alexander Skwar
- Re: [newbie] Text v. HTML messages ... Fran Parker
- [newbie] Reply text goes ON TO... John Glasscock
- RE: [newbie] Reply text go... walt
- RE: [newbie] Reply tex... Mark Weaver
- Re: [newbie] Reply text go... Mark Weaver