Alas. No real information follows, unless you have to administer lists with newbies. I just felt compelled to respond. Apologies to all too curious to hit delete.
See my "FAQ for newbies that administrators might want to cite" post for more substantive information.
At 10:58 PM -0600 04/01/02, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>Please don't Cc me.
That was a byproduct of hitting "reply-to-all". I won't get into the reply-to-header-munging debate here. ;)
>Bruce Epstein - Zeus Productions <bruce@zeusprod.com> wrote:
>>At 11:22 AM -0600 04/01/02, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>>Eh. Who needs attachments. Everyone needs to turn off HTML alternate part
>>>attachments; it's evil. I just reject 'em.
>
>>I'm not talking just about HTML. I run a mailing list for my kids' school and
>>people like to email 5 MB of class photos to the list. People also like to
>>send Word docs (such as minutes of board meetings) as attachments.
>
>Exactly why you shouldn't allow them. There can be nasty scripts in Word
>macros; they don't belong on mailing lists.
I think I'm tired of you talking down to me, so I'm going to respond. Everyone on this list, including me, knows that Word macro viruses are.
FYI, I wrote: "Mj2 also makes it easier to suppress attachments and HTML, I think, although I'm not sure if I got that working properly. (I just followed the "list setup" FAQ but some attachments still seem to come through provided they are not MIME-encoded)."
I was decrying Word and JPEG attachments, not recommending them. I don't know what gave you the impression that I liked attachments, so I'm not sure who you are arguing with. I (perhaps mistakenly) inferred that you were saying that HTML alternates are the only common type of attachments. I agree that no attachments of any sort are acceptable on mailing lists.
I'm in *favor* of suppressing attachments, but I was saying that I wasn't *successful* in suppressing them on my first attempt and haven't gotten around to debugging it. I'm sure I'll figure it out once I find the time.
> As for the photos, provide a bit of
>Web space for that, or better yet, let the user do it.
Alas, I'm still not in the mood to be talked down to. These users don't even know what an ftp program is, much less how to use one. I've offered web space, but people on this list (it's school parents) don't understand basic terminology. They don't understand the difference between email and the web (I'm not kiddding).
> >These are unsophisticated users, so they don't listen when you ask nicely.
>
>Say "no", explain. They'll listen. People learn if you expect them to, but
>that's no reason to inflict their bad habits on everyone else.
I'm really not in the mood to debate you, although I will if I must. These are people who don't even know their ass from their elbow. They think "attachment" means the feeling of loss they experience when their pet hamster dies.
> >But yes, I agree that HTML should not be allowed on email lists. (no flame
>>wars please).
>
>Who is going to disagree?
My point exactly. :)
Anyway, sorry for flaming. I can take being misunderstood, but I can't take being repeatedly misunderstood and talked down to in the same post.
Cheers,
Bruce
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
