What a concept! Instead of trying to embrace and use new technologies, let's
just filter it out.
Why should we ever use anything but fixed font black and white messages?
Let's keep messaging in the 60's instead of trying to of moving into the
>From: Jerry Peek[SMTP:email@example.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 1996 10:36 AM
>To: Gene Rackow
>Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; firstname.lastname@example.org
>Subject: Re: Microsoft Exchange mail to list server addresses.
>On 5 March, Gene Rackow <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone have a reasonable (not total flame) reply available to tell
>> people how to set options or whatever on Microsoft Exchange so that it
>> does NOT do all the MIME packaging of a plain text message.
>I've thought about putting a filter in front of lists that catches
>these messages and either bounces them back to the sender (with
>instructions), forwards them to the list owner, or filters out the
>plain text. I never got around to it. Here's a message I have,
>though, with some info. I don't know if this is all correct (I haven't
>used Exchange either) but it seems OK.
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ben Goetter)
>Subject: Re: What is WINMAIL.DAT?
>Date: Sun, 28 Jan 96 22:32:05 GMT
>Organization: Angry Greycat Designs
>WINMAIL.DAT, and how to make it disappear:
>Q: When I send mail to an Internet mailing list, its members complain that
>my messages contain big binary attachments. What's happening? How can I
>get rid of these?
>A: Those attachments contain Exchange's rich text information, encoding
>attributes of the message such as boldface, underlining, fonts, and
>colors. Exchange/Internet Mail puts these attributes into an
>attachment so that they can appear to other Exchange users on the
>Internet. The problem arises when people not using Exchange receive
>these attachments: instead of seeing a formatted message, they see a
>big chunk of UUENCODE data named WINMAIL.DAT if you're using UUENCODE,
>or a section application/ms-tnef if you're using MIME, each full of
>For communicating with users of other clients, Exchange contains an
>option to suppress sending rich text information when mailing them. If
>you double-click on an underlined recipient (the underline means that
>Exchange has recognized the name, and associated an address with it) in
>the To or Cc fields on the message form, and you're using the Internet
>Mail provider, you'll see a check box labeled Send to this recipient in
>Microsoft rich text format. Always clear this check box if you suspect
>that your recipient isn't using Exchange. If this flag is clear for
>every recipient on a message, Exchange/Internet Mail will strip the
>rich text information when it sends it, eliminating the mysterious
>binary attachments. Note however that if the message has multiple
>recipients, and any one of them has the flag set, Exchange will include
>the rich text attachments in the message, which all recipients will
>receive, regardless of their particular flag setting.
>Whether this flag initially appears set or not depends on the origin of
>that underlined name. If you got the name by typing a literal
>email@example.com SMTP address, the check box will be clear by default.
>If you got it by specifying a SMTP one-off - i.e. by typing
>[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org] - it will be set by default. If you got it by
>typing a name and letting the system pick it from your Personal Address
>Book, it will have whatever value you have set on the name in your PAB.
>Finally, here's the tricky part: if you got it by giving the reply
>command in Exchange, Exchange guesses as to whether this should be set
>or not, and when replying to Internet mailing lists, it always seems to
>guess wrong. You can see this by reading a mailing list message in
>Exchange, giving the reply command, then double-clicking on the
>recipient you see in the To field of the note form, and there checking
>the setting of the rich text check box.
>You can work around this either by replacing the reply address with an
>entry from your PAB that you know has rich text disabled, or else by
>always manually clearing the check box as needed.