[OT] Rudeness and Netiquette (was: FAQ)

2003-10-16 Thread T. Ribbrock
and - especially on computer realated lists - it's been absolutely *standard* in all those forums to expect from the participants to do their home work before crying for help. I've been flamed in the beginnings for not doing so, and rightly so. I've learned from it. The Netiquette is there for a reason. I

Re: [OT] Rudeness and Netiquette (was: FAQ)

2003-10-16 Thread Edward Croft
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 08:49, T. Ribbrock wrote: Snip Don't Worry Have a Homebrew! Maybe that was the reason... ;-) Don't worry, have a penguin doesn't quite work the same way... :-)) Nonetheless, I'm curious: How big was the scope of that forum: A few hundred? Thousands? Local, worldwide?

Netiquette (was: (no subject))

2002-10-07 Thread Thomas Ribbrock
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 01:09:22PM -0500, Vidiot wrote: It is a netiquette rule that postings to mail list be done in plain text. [...] [...Unnecessary Fullquote Snipped!...] I wouldn't hark about Netiquette so much if I was you... Topquoting and not trimming unnecessary quotes violates

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-07 Thread Martin Mewes
Hi Tim, Tim Kehres wrote: These rules (netiquette pertaining to HTML postings) have been around since almost before time began (at least in reference to modern email usage). At the time they made a lot sense. In terms of current usage, not as much, IMHO. When sending content that can

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Tim Kehres
These rules (netiquette pertaining to HTML postings) have been around since almost before time began (at least in reference to modern email usage). At the time they made a lot sense. In terms of current usage, not as much, IMHO. When sending content that can be sent either way, it's always

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Joseph A Nagy Jr
Tim Kehres wrote: These rules (netiquette pertaining to HTML postings) have been around since almost before time began (at least in reference to modern email usage). At the time they made a lot sense. In terms of current usage, not as much, IMHO. When sending content that can be sent

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Robert P. J. Day
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Tim Kehres wrote: The majority of email clients today however are HTML aware, and the percentage of people using such HTML-aware clients is only increasing. 9x% of the world uses Microsoft software. This does not make it a good thing. rday -- redhat-list mailing

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread jkinz
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 03:14:01AM +0800, Tim Kehres wrote: These rules (netiquette pertaining to HTML postings) have been around since almost before time began (at least in reference to modern email usage). At the time they made a lot sense. In terms of current usage, not as much, IMHO

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Hal Burgiss
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 03:37:00PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Tim Kehres wrote: The majority of email clients today however are HTML aware, and the percentage of people using such HTML-aware clients is only increasing. 9x% of the world uses Microsoft software.

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Scott
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Hal Burgiss wrote: I wonder what percentage of those had viruses or other bad things happen as a result of this brain dead tendency. Text based mail is a great, free AV tool (for those saddled with MS software). Pine all the way! What I love is the amount of email going

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Keith Winston
On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 15:14, Tim Kehres wrote: The majority of email clients today however are HTML aware, and the percentage of people using such HTML-aware clients is only increasing. The reasons are simple - it is easier to read (typically), and more information can be conveyed

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Vidiot
The majority of email clients today however are HTML aware, and the percentage of people using such HTML-aware clients is only increasing. The reasons are simple - it is easier to read (typically), and more information can be conveyed effectively. Other lists that I'm subscribed to have made

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Tim Kehres
I disagree. If everyone used HTML mail just for things like screenshots or where an image was essential, then maybe it would be workable. However, most people use HTML mail to create a fancy border or background, or to hideously misuse fonts, in most cases communicating nothing useful and

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Tim Kehres
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 03:14:01AM +0800, Tim Kehres wrote: These rules (netiquette pertaining to HTML postings) have been around since almost before time began (at least in reference to modern email usage). At the time they made a lot sense. In terms of current usage, not as much

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Tim Kehres
The majority of email clients today however are HTML aware, and the percentage of people using such HTML-aware clients is only increasing. The reasons are simple - it is easier to read (typically), and more information can be conveyed effectively. Other lists that I'm subscribed to have

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Andrés
I thought this list was to discuss the redhat distro, not some sort of holy war. Gee, the real slashdot effect is everywhere now I guess. Filtering will do I guess. __ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos More

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Tim Kehres
I thought this list was to discuss the redhat distro, not some sort of holy war. Gee, the real slashdot effect is everywhere now I guess. You're right - let's take this discussion off list, OK? Best Regards, -- Tim -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL

Re: HTML Mail / Netiquette

2002-10-06 Thread Anthony E. Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07-Oct-2002/06:26 +0800, Tim Kehres [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow - people still use elm! :-) Anyway, there is a simple solution to this - use either POP3 and/or IMAP4 capable clients. SSL is supported on top of both protocols. I use mutt. When

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-06 Thread Anthony E. Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05-Sep-2002/22:00 -0500, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone wrote: On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Mark wrote: 1) delete the messages other than the one you are replying to. You can burst digests into separate messages. That

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-06 Thread Kevin MacNeil
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 07:17:58AM -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote: What is the point of getting digests? Filters put the messages in a folder, so there's no mail organization issue. Since I'm going to read them when I get ready, I don't care if they're downloaded a few at a time or all at

Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Mark
Folks, I've now been on the list for a couple of weeks, and I get the digest, and it seems as though there are a lot of newbies, so, as a public service to make the list easier to read, and more comprehensible, here's some standard email netiquette: 1) delete the messages other than

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Thomas Ribbrock
netiquette: 1) delete the messages other than the one you are replying to. The usual answers in the past to this have been along the lines of: Harddrives and bandwidth are cheap, so who cares anyway., so don't hold your breath. :-/ 2) set your email so that you send out text only (or, if you

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Sam Ockman
I almost hate to get into any conversation about netiquette, but let me give one piece of advice that will make it easier for those of that use the thread feature under mutt (or some other mailer). [If you haven't tried threading your email messages, try it...if you're mailer won't let you, try

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Vidiot
Mark posted: I've now been on the list for a couple of weeks, and I get the digest, and it seems as though there are a lot of newbies, so, as a public service to make the list easier to read, and more comprehensible, here's some standard email netiquette: 1) delete the messages other than

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Sam Ockman
You can easily do this with procmail yourself (but you probably knew that). It's better not to mangle the subject line, because that information is already in the headers... I get annoyed by the lists that put it in...since all my lists are procmailed to different folders to begin with. -Sam

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Bret Hughes
On Thu, 2002-09-05 at 16:22, Sam Ockman wrote: You can easily do this with procmail yourself (but you probably knew that). It's better not to mangle the subject line, because that information is already in the headers... I get annoyed by the lists that put it in...since all my lists are

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Mark
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I is done writ: snip 2) set your email so that you send out text only (or, if you *absolutely* *must* have fonts, etc, html only); in any case, *please* make sure that you aren't sending out text *and* html, which drives the rest of us crazy.

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Anthony E. Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05-Sep-2002/14:09 -0500, Vidiot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would also be great of RedHat put [RHL] on the front of the Subject line on the main list, and other abbreviations in front of the other lists. I am on lots of e-mail lists and RH is the

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Anthony E. Greene
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05-Sep-2002/11:35 -0700, Sam Ockman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I almost hate to get into any conversation about netiquette, but let me give one piece of advice that will make it easier for those of that use the thread feature under mutt (or some

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Kevin MacNeil
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Mark wrote: 1) delete the messages other than the one you are replying to. You can burst digests into separate messages. That way you can have proper threading and can reply to single messages without fiddling, and still only download a few messages a

Re: Netiquette

2002-09-05 Thread Mark
Someone wrote: On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Mark wrote: 1) delete the messages other than the one you are replying to. You can burst digests into separate messages. That way you can have proper threading and can reply to single messages without fiddling, and still only