On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 08:02:19 -0600, @lbutlr stated: >On 19 Mar 2020, at 00:16, Philip Paeps <phi...@trouble.is> wrote: >> On 2020-03-18 09:51:45 (+0800), Wesley Peng wrote: >>> Following this guide: >>> https://useplaintext.email/ >>> >>> Shall we use plaintext message in regular email communication? >> >> You should use what the content of the message needs modulo your >> recipients' wishes. >> >> I personally prefer to receive plain text but I don't mind receiving >> conservatively marked up HTML email (e.g. emphasis, hyperlinks, >> tables, ... even embedded images if the message requires them). >> Others may (will) have other preferences. > >The problem with the position is that many people feel their messages >RECQUIRE their colorful signature, large corporate logo, and 14 line >of meaningless “This message is private communication… blah blah” > >(I use to post those emails to sites like pastern and send the person >the link, but now I just delete them unread) > >> In my experience, plain text suffices for the vast majority of >> mailing list discussions. > >And in the very few cases where an image is required it is better to >link to the image. > >Once you allow any image or HTML it becomes impossible to limit it to >only the necessary formatting. > >> Trying to force people to limit themselves to plain text is not a >> productive use of anyone's time. > >That’s why the best solution is for the mailing list to simply strip >all attachments and also reject messages that do not have text/plain >parts. This takes no time and no one needs to waste time or be >bothered about it and there’s also no one to complain to since it’s >all automated. > >The people who really can’t deal without having their pink text >handwriting font on a lime green background with an animated gif >attached will either adapt or go away. > >script execution error (#127): sh: line 7:
Honestly, I fail to see why receivers of HTML based emails seem to feel they have a right to get themselves into a hissy fit and dictate what type or form of email is permissible? Who made them GODS? When I receive an email, I have two immediate choices to make; either read it or don't read it. From there, I can choose to save or archive the message, delete it or potentially forward or reply to it. I have yet to understand this hatred of HTML email. Perhaps the recipient has Autophobia. Maybe it is related to Trypophobia. Perhaps it is something entirely different. In any case, who cares? Personally, I prefer basic plain text. However, working for a municipality has caused me to use HTML quite frequently. The adage "A picture is worth a thousand words" is certainly relevant to this. In any case, I have so many more meaningful and useful things to accomplish, that I just do not have the time to waste on such a frivolous and doomed from the start attempt at convincing others that there is only one acceptable way to do things and it is mine. Don't like HTML; then don't use it. However, you don't have the right to tell others what then can do. The last time I checked, there was no RFC against it. Simply blacklist the sender, the site or whatever and get on with your life. -- Gerard
