I beg you to cite the place where this list abides by these "Age-old
standards".
I've cited some standards about mailing lists to people before -- but
usually along the lines of "don't quote 100 lines and give only 1 of your
own" or "don't use 10 line signatures". I don't complain about whether my
mail reader is only intelligent enough to recognise "-- " as a leader to a
signature instead of "--" or "- Michael" ... That, and I much prefer to put
my statements above the quoted text if my statement deals with the entirety
of the comment (not just segments, as yours was), so that anyone following
the list can quickly read what I have to say without scrolling.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Because I reformatted his mail according to age-old standards. In short,
it boils down to the following:
[ MTB: available in archives: http://www-archive.ornl.gov:8000/ ]
Rationale: some people
actually pay for download. Full quotes with HTML make an email
significantly bigger than necessary (like, 5 times per average) without
buying the reader anything. All it takes is a little thoughtfulness on
behalf of the users of inferior (or badly set up) software (cf. my sig
for a good tool). Is that asked too much, Paul?
[ MTB: cf. http://cr.yp.to/sarcasm/modest-proposal.txt ]
