Top posting

[Kevin Cozens]

On 13-05-28 01:43 PM, Jamon Camisso wrote:
> To draw upon McLuhan: if the medium is the message (HTML being the
> medium for the contents of an email), then the message as I see it on a
> regular basis consists of mostly badly formed syntactic messes of
> irrelevant divs, fonts and formatting, the sheer bulk of which largely
> outweigh the actual meaningful content of said message.

I feel that way about XML formatting outweighing the data it encloses vs. 
standard text files, but that would be a discussion for another thread.

> Signatures are infinitely worse for the value that they impart to a
> discussion and they deserve their own special place in email hell.

I don't mind signatures. They are easy to ignore as they are (supposed to
be) at the bottom of the message. I often read email messages without ever
taking any note of what signature block may have existed at the bottom.

-- 
Cheers!

Kevin.

http://www.ve3syb.ca/           |"Nerds make the shiny things that distract
Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172      | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're
                                 | powerful!"
#include <disclaimer/favourite> |             --Chris Hardwick
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists