* Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote this on 09 30, 02 at 20:56:
> * Sven Guckes said:
> > well, if you subscribe to a HTML-only newsletter
> > then you were asking for it - so it's your problem.
>
> * Michael Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-26 17:27]:
> > It's *not* a problem, for me, any
* Sven Guckes said:
> well, if you subscribe to a HTML-only newsletter
> then you were asking for it - so it's your problem.
* Michael Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-26 17:27]:
> It's *not* a problem, for me, anyway.
so you are ignoring the extra but superfluous data - fine.
> I know about
* Laurabelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-26 18:03]:
> Just my 2p - I use procmail recipes (and a couple of scripts) to strip
> HTML formatting from all legitimate email. The same scripts add a note
> to the effect that HTML has been removed; if I want to exchange email
> with that person again,
On Sep 26 2002, Sven Guckes shared a puddle of experience:
Just my 2p - I use procmail recipes (and a couple of scripts) to strip
HTML formatting from all legitimate email. The same scripts add a note
to the effect that HTML has been removed; if I want to exchange email
with that person again,
Sven Guckes said:
> * Mike Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-26 03:35]:
>> > > Actually, I've gotten many non-HTML spams, too.
>> > > And I get many valid HTML mail, both
>> > > newsletters and private correspondence.
>> > has the thought ever struck you that it might be *you*?
>>
>> Since I know
* Mike Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-26 03:35]:
> > > Actually, I've gotten many non-HTML spams, too.
> > > And I get many valid HTML mail, both
> > > newsletters and private correspondence.
> > has the thought ever struck you that it might be *you*?
>
> Since I know many different people tha
* Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote this on 09 25, 02 at 21:26:
> * On Sep 25 2002, Erik Christiansen..:
> > Of the 2247 advertising spams I've received
> > since February, 1899 were html.
>
> * Laurabelle said:
> > Am I the only one who read that as "February 1899" and
> > thought "what, th
* On Sep 25 2002, Erik Christiansen..:
> Of the 2247 advertising spams I've received
> since February, 1899 were html.
* Laurabelle said:
> Am I the only one who read that as "February 1899" and
> thought "what, they had the internet back *then*?"
* Michael Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-25
Laurabelle said:
> On Sep 25 2002, Erik Christiansen shared a puddle of experience:
>
>
>> (Of the 2247 advertising spams I've received since February, 1899
>>were html.)
>
> Am I the only one who read that as "February 1899" and thought "what,
> they had the internet back *then*?"
Yes, but o
On Sep 25 2002, Erik Christiansen shared a puddle of experience:
> (Of the 2247 advertising spams I've received since February, 1899
>were html.)
Am I the only one who read that as "February 1899" and thought "what,
they had the internet back *then*?"
Laurabelle
--
ASCII silly question, get
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 07:51:13AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> > for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> > mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:36:49PM +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
let procmail kil
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Benjamin Pflugmann wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Tue 2002-09-24 at 15:36:49 +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
> > I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> > for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> > mails that happen upon my inbox - what
Hello.
On Tue 2002-09-24 at 15:36:49 +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
Be sure to u
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
> bill luecke said:
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:36:49PM +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
> >
> > I have the following line in my .mailcap
> >
> > text/html; unhtml ; copiousoutput
>
> good answer - apt-get install unhtml on debian
>
> But it is still almost a sec
bill luecke said:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:36:49PM +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
>
> I have the following line in my .mailcap
>
> text/html; unhtml ; copiousoutput
good answer - apt-get install unhtml on debian
But it is still almost a second delay.
I think i will try and kill this problem with
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 03:36:49PM +0200, Eric Smith wrote:
I have the following line in my .mailcap
text/html; unhtml ; copiousoutput
I think the unhtml website is at
http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/unhtml/
Then I view the mail as an attachment, and unhtml strips out the
tags. Seems instantan
* Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [09-24-02 08:54]:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
I use:
text/html; w3m -F
* Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020924 15:36]:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
Procmail
:0
*Content-type
* Eric "old fruit" Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-24 13:44]:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait for
> `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html mails that
> happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip the tags faster?
well - do no
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
someone commented on "lynx -dump" r
Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
Deleting HTML mail unread. It's /muc
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
> I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
> for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
> mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
> the tags faster?
Telling people not to send email as
I am getting a bit irritated by the second or two I need to wait
for `lynx -dump' or similiar to work when viewing the _many_ html
mails that happen upon my inbox - what are mutters doing to strip
the tags faster?
--
Eric Smith
24 matches
Mail list logo
