Re: [OT] Mail-Followup-To, Outlook

[Reiner Steib]

[ Broken citation fixed using ``gnus-article-outlook-deuglify-article' ]

On Fri, Mar 21 2008, Drew Adams wrote:

> Those might be the cat's meow, but with the exception of
> Mutt they don't even register on the mail client usage stats
> I've seen - e.g.
> https://messaging.its.monash.edu.au/stats/client/. 

We are on a mailing list, so I offer a (slightly outdated) statistic
on mailing lists: <http://gmane.org/user-agents.php>.  Mutt, Kmail
and Gnus appear there.  ;-)

> Most of the universe is nonconformist and disrespectful, it seems.
> ;-)

As already explained, Mail-Followup-To is not a standard (yet?):

>> As it is not a standard and not very widely used, I don't complain
>> about anyone _not_ respecting it.  Dan's MMV.
[...]
>> Wrong.  Probably nobody is forced to use this software when
>> participating on this mailing list.
>
> Your "probably" is an unwarranted assumption, depending on
> how severely one interprets "forced to". I'm using my work
> computer with a work mailing address and a work mail client.
> I could choose to buy another computer, 

You could post via Gmane.org
<http://news.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/> without installing any new
program.

That said, I don't care what client you use.  If most of your postings
look like the recent ones, I will just adjust my score file and not
read your articles anymore.  (This is not supposed to be a threat
against you; it's just how I always handle this.)

> get another mailing address, wait until I'm home to answer mail, and
> so on, so I'm not strictly "forced to" use Outlook for this list.

[...]

> I looked at deuglify.el too. Kammquoting doesn't seem like a
> big deal, to me, but I agree that it is not pretty and
> reduces readability. 

It's no problem at all for users of Outlook (Express), but for
everyone else.

> Anyway, AFAICT, my posts and their wrapped lines are less ugly than
> a lot of others.

?

> I've reduced the wrap column to 60 - perhaps that will help
> a little. 

Maybe this made it worse.  At least, today was the first time I recall
that your articles contain so much "Kammquoting".

> BTW, the Commentary in deuglify.el speaks of "illegal"
> unwrapping, which is no doubt inappropriate terminology.

Already fixed in CVS (trunk and Emacs 22.2): "invalid"

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/