On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Per-Olof Karlsson wrote: An excellent post, Dr. Karlsson. I do disagree with a couple of minor points though:
One set of rules governing said mailing list and a now-defunct list operator who is no longer able to oversee and employ the code of conduct.
I wouldn't say Lazlo is defunct. He's just not on the list. If a guy who owns as many email lists as he does were subscribed to them all, he would never have time to do anything but read mail. That's why it's up to us to notify him when something goes wrong beyond our ability to self-moderate. I was on the verge of emailing him myself last night, but I thought I would post the rules first. I'll wait and see if the situation improves.
It can be argued that the old rule against HTML and Rich Text is more or less obsolete today, given the fact that many people use Web-based e-mail services where HTML is the only choice of format they are given. Bandwidth is hardly limited today either, which is the prime reason for disallowing anything but plain text in the first place. I believe we can safely assume that this rule is no longer an active one.
Lazlo owns the list, Lazlo makes the rules. The rules say no HTML. Also, the apparent fact that the majority of people *can* use HTML in email does not justify forcing everyone to do so. Also consider: - HTML does not add anything to the discussion. Nobody will be able to communicate more effectively if they use HTML. Imagine if OJ also had access to fonts and colors to convey his **_EMPHASIS_**. - Some people choose not to use HTML-enabled mail readers. Some choose to disable HTML support in their mail readers because they feel it is potentially dangerous. Some people (the blind, for instance) are unable to use HTML mail readers. - Anyone who can read HTML mail can also read plaintext mail. The reverse is not true. The obvious conclusion is that it would be counterproductive to allow HTML in non-Web forums. Other than that, your post sums up the situation very well. Probably better than I could have done. Thanks very much for posting.