Re: HTML: woes

Dwayne (
Thu, 12 Mar 1998 22:22:53 +1100

Michael Lorrey wrote:

> > I agree with what you are saying in principle, it's just that I don't think it applies
> > to email. If even one member of the list cannot read HTML, why should the rest of us
> > exclude this person, when it really serves no valid purpose? Is the ability to mix and
> > match fonts going to make the list more useful than the opinions/thoughts/rants/agitprop
> > of that individual? I doubt it, although suffering through the interminable abortion
> > thread makes me doubt this conclusion.
> Flip it. Why should the rest of us who are moving ahead be held back by the stubborn
> intransigence of those opposed to progress? This list is for forward thinkers.

I'm not here to be on the cutting edge of everything. I'm here to *discuss* the cutting edge of
everything. If I were to follow your logic, I would refuse to read anything not written in
lobjan, or some other "cutting edge" language.

Luckily I don't. I don't follow any logic when it comes to discussion fora such as this one, as
it strikes me as silly to allow some pointless ideal to get between me and those I wish to
discuss things with. I'm here to learn things, to discuss things, to be part of a conversation,
and it seems to me that rather than looking into "progress"-ive standards, we should support
standard standards: something *everyone* can understand, not the 3l33t few. At this point in
time, it seems that english expressed in ascii work pretty well. Maybe that will change
eventually, but for now it strikes me as ludicrous to say to someone "I'm not interested in what
you have to say because your text isn't 'cool' enough".

I fail to see how using ascii is holding you back. I understood perfectly well your point. How
would HTML have made it clearer?