VOTE ...HTML or Plain Text???

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:15:55 -0500, "Montblack"
wrote:

I was surprised by the acceptance of an HTML post in another thread. I, for
one, could read the HTML fine. Others said the same thing.

Usually some one will remind the offender that posting in HTML is a
practice to be discouraged.


Has the time come for HTML in the newsgroup(s)?

I don't think so.


My (change is bad - we fear change) vote is no HTML ... for now.

The change isn't bad, but it's what can be done with HTML that is
potentially bad.


I'm being fuddy-duddy with my reason: I get bombarded with "wow" media all
day. It's a nice change of pace to read the ol' newsgroups in a plain text
format.

Set your e-mail client to text only. The latest version of Outlook
Express even has that as an option.


I have no clue what technical problems HTML causes for some other newsgroup
participants.

I have all my mail and newsgroups to read plain text only...for
several reasons. (and I use Outlook express for mail)

1. HTML is a handy way to spread viruses and Trojan horses.
If you set your reader to take HTML for one, it will
do it for all.

2. HTML can be tagged to contact the sender, or even redirect the
opener to a web site.
It's often used in spam to verify the address as valid.
Leaving HTML turned on is almost guaranteed to increase the amount of
spam you receive.
3. HTML takes far more storage space on the news group servers
than does text
4 Many news readers are not capable of reading HTML
5. Many of us have our readers set to not enable HTML

6. It may make it almost impossible for a text to speech
translator to work properly. (for the blind)

..BUT, it can be made to look pretty.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)



Your vote on HTML.....?