No subject

-0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from owner-classiccmp at classiccmp.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: opal.tseinc.com: majordom set sender to 
owner-classiccmp at classiccmp.org using -f
Received: from armigeron.com (IDENT:spc at wopr.armigeron.com [208.235.96.113])
	by opal.tseinc.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA59582
	for <classiccmp at classiccmp.org>; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 02:39:17 -0600 
(CST)
	(envelope-from spc at armigeron.com)
Received: (from spc at localhost)
	by armigeron.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA11126
	for classiccmp at classiccmp.org; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 03:41:07 -0500
From: "Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner" <spc at armigeron.com>
Message-Id: <200002050841.DAA11126 at armigeron.com>
Subject: Re: HTML in Email
To: classiccmp at classiccmp.org
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 03:41:07 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <l03102802b4c17d70f57e@[24.24.232.57]> from "Mike Ford" at Feb 
04, 2000 11:16:33 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-classiccmp at classiccmp.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: classiccmp at classiccmp.org
Status: R

It was thus said that the Great Mike Ford once stated:
> 
> OTOH I would not be willing to bet that some user on this list hasn't
> entered a message via toggle switches in octal. ;) They are just the ones
> to use HTML to prove a point. Actually it sounds a bit easier than the
> method Allison is using now. <ducking and running>

  Actually, this isn't the first time this topic has come up on this list. 
The last time was .. wow!  January of 1999 (hmmmm ... seasonal topic?).  And
last time, Chuck McManis wanted HTML:

> Sheesh. Plain text really sucks. Y'all prefer that someone type _like 
this_
> to indicate a piece of underlined text? or my habit *bolding* with
> asterisks? This message "encoded" with HTML is roughly 5% larger than it 
is
> in plain text. Wow, now that's a waste of resources.

  I responded in kind (and also in Postscript, morse code, and uuencoded
DVI).

  -spc (I wonder what complaints about email we'll be bitching, uh,
	discussing, next year?)