From xod@thestonecutters.net Thu Dec 12 08:34:49 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 12 Dec 2002 16:34:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 38986 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 16:34:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Dec 2002 16:34:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 16:34:49 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18MWIT-0006CF-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:34:49 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MWIK-0006BS-00; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:34:40 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:34:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MWI7-0006AQ-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:34:27 -0800 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBCGXwq19935 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:33:59 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:33:58 -0500 (EST) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: bridling hostility (was: RE: Re: the ethics of the HTML content meta tag In-Reply-To: <20021212162839.GB65058@allusion.net> Message-ID: <20021212112713.Q19615-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3483 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple Yes, this speaks to the subject, doesn't it? The net is a wild and wooly place, and special, old-school requirements are surely the responsibility of the eccentric recipient only. HTML mail is not unreasonable in the year 2002, when most email clients are HTML-savvy. On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote: > Could you not send html in mail? (At least, if you expect it to > be read). > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 03:07:22PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > [?] > > -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.