> I have stated that while in general I do not like HTML email, but > am willing to make specific exceptions. I have stated that for > that reason, for my purposes I would consider a rejection of > *all* HTML email as draconian. I have stated that classifying all > HTML email as spam does not fit the standard definition of spam. > Nowhere have I stated "HTML = good".
Sorry Dave. I view dictionaries, as the late lexicographer David P. Guralnick said " Dictionaries are historical documents, recording where a language was at the time it went to print" (or words to that effect. The great Ambrose Bierce had yet another definition of the dictionary as "A malevolent literary device which makes a language hard and in-elastic." What I am leading up to, is that I reject your definition of spam. Spam is a personal thing and we are dealing in semantics here. You don't want all HTML to be viewed as Spam. I do. End of story. -- Regards, Mike Using The Bat! v1.62q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62r | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
