Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days back
when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late 80's
early 90's). Those were the good days!

Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Hi Kerry,
>
> No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> against viruses.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
>
> > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
> > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > exist as well.
> > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a message
> > in the format it was received in.
> >
> > Regards, Kerry.
> > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >
> > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > real problem.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > >
> > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gena
> > > > >
> > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > E-mail: gena at gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>