Love thy mutt-ng users

[Derek Broughton]

Shawn McMahon wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 04:11:36PM +0000, Mark Shuttleworth said:
>>   <pre wrap=""><!---->
>> C&#8217;mon Mark, you should know better than to post in HTML-only&#8230;
>>   </pre>
>> </blockquote>
>> Wow, I decided to do this only today, figuring that "the world has had
>> good html mail readers for at least five years, everyone must have this
>> sorted". Clearly not :-)<br>
>> <br>
>> So, should I stay with text forever? HTML is perfectly open and
>> standardised now.<br>
> 
> Mutt users may be able to read it by piping it through lynx etc., but
> this is what it will look like when we reply.  (Assuming we don't trim
> quotes, which of course I would ordinarily do with gusto.)
> 
> BTW, I don't set Mutt to do this automatically, since buffer overflows
> in web browsers seem to come more often than buffer overflows in Mutt.
> I typically delete HTML-only mail unread; I frankly only read yours
> because it's from you.  Folks who take this approach are a minority, but
> we're not a tiny one, and we're decidedly vocal.  :)

Agreed.  I use KMail.  Perfectly capable of reading HTML mail, but I would
never consider using HTML for mailing lists/newsgroups.  I really don't
_want_ to be at the whim of somebody else's formatting, and certainly don't
want to force mine on others.

In short, yes, you _should_ stay with text forever on most mail lists.
-- 
derek