hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I tried to talk to AOL but to no avail. Any suggestions?
Pat
On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 08:41:43AM -0400, Padreger@aol.com wrote:
Hi...if this message is in HTML please let me know. adamw's comment
came
as a surprise, as it is the only such complaint I have ever had.
It's the same as the other one; in multipart/alternative form, with both plain text and HTML versions. Not as distasteful as pure HTML mail, but still bad in terms of bloated message size.
-- Khendon (Jason Williams) khendon@khendon.org.uk http://www.jasonandali.org.uk/jason/ [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 14:22, Padreger@aol.com wrote:
hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I tried to talk to AOL but to no avail. Any suggestions?
Quit using AOL?
;)
But seriously - can you not get AOL to give you the server names for proper IMAP or POP3 email and then use a proper email client? Is that not possible on AOL?
--- Adam Williamson aw280@cam.ac.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 14:22, Padreger@aol.com wrote:
hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I
tried to talk to AOL but
to no avail. Any suggestions?
Quit using AOL?
;)
But seriously - can you not get AOL to give you the server names for proper IMAP or POP3 email and then use a proper email client? Is that not possible on AOL?
It might be (does anyone know?), but perhaps Pat has never delt with setting up an email client. Many computer users don't know what IMAP and POP3 even mean.
Stephen G.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Padreger@aol.com wrote:
hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I tried to talk to AOL but to no avail. Any suggestions?
Pat
Look here; http://www.houghi.org I am not sure of it usefull for AOL users.
Giskart
Padreger@aol.com wrote:
hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I tried to talk to AOL but to no avail. Any suggestions?
Pat
On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 08:41:43AM -0400, Padreger@aol.com wrote:
Hi...if this message is in HTML please let me know. adamw's
comment came
as a surprise, as it is the only such complaint I have ever had.
It's the same as the other one; in multipart/alternative form, with both plain text and HTML versions. Not as distasteful as pure HTML mail, but still bad in terms of bloated message size.
-- Khendon (Jason Williams) khendon@khendon.org.uk http://www.jasonandali.org.uk/jason/
Your earliest message had black on grey, and that was a bit annoying, but your changes fixed that to my satisfaction. The message to which I am replying came through perfectly well. Maybe Khendon is the one that should be reviewing his settings.
Frankly I though AdamW was a little too aggressive in his approach on the issue. Your explanation about not knowing that it was happening is very normal, and the simple explanation of the problem and how to fix it is all it takes to correct it.
Anyway, welcome aboard, and I hope that the sometimes agressive approach of a few of our colleagues doesn't scare you away. I look forward to seeing your contributions.
Eclecticology
On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 18:28, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Frankly I though AdamW was a little too aggressive in his approach on the issue. Your explanation about not knowing that it was happening is very normal, and the simple explanation of the problem and how to fix it is all it takes to correct it.
If I was, then sorry, there was no intention to be - as you say, many people use HTML mail not because they *chose* to but because that was the mailer default and they didn't even know about the plain text / HTML distinction, which is why I point it out to people, along with some reasons why they may want to change to plain text. That's all I was trying to do.
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 18:28, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Frankly I though AdamW was a little too aggressive in his approach on the issue. Your explanation about not knowing that it was happening is very normal, and the simple explanation of the problem and how to fix it is all it takes to correct it.
If I was, then sorry, there was no intention to be - as you say, many people use HTML mail not because they *chose* to but because that was the mailer default and they didn't even know about the plain text / HTML distinction, which is why I point it out to people, along with some reasons why they may want to change to plain text. That's all I was trying to do.
Nothing personal about it. Sometimes it's just a matter of tone, and that too is a matter of perceptions. When newbies are involved in this kind of issue I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt. Those of us who may have been around a little longer can be expected to have a thicker skin. Your later postings in this seemed calmer. Peace.
--- Padreger@aol.com wrote:
hmmm.......I don't know what to do about it. I tried to talk to AOL but to no avail. Any suggestions?
Pat
I wouldn't worry too much about it, Pat. Another user on this list tends to send HTML email as well, and it isn't a huge problem. You might try asking AOL tech support how to send only "plain text email". Getting rid of AOL would also help, but that's a little more extreme. :)
In any case, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you have fun!
Stephen Gilbert
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org