help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Can anybody tell me how to send HTML-format mail in gnus


From: Xah
Subject: Re: Can anybody tell me how to send HTML-format mail in gnus
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2008 03:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
User-agent: G2/1.0

On Aug 8, 3:15 pm, Phil Carmody <address@hidden>
wrote:
> Xah<address@hidden> writes:
> > On Aug 8, 10:06 am, Phil Carmody <address@hidden>
> > wrote:
> >>Xah<address@hidden> writes:
> >> > On Aug 8, 7:56 am, Phil Carmody <address@hidden>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>Xah<address@hidden> writes:
> >> >> > On Aug 7, 10:54 pm, Tim X <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> >> >> I disagree with your suggestion that HTML is technically superior. 
> >> >> >> You
> >> >> >> can't just make a sweeping statement like that without actually 
> >> >> >> defining
> >> >> >> what it is that e-mail is supposed to provide. As someone else 
> >> >> >> pointed
> >> >> >> out, an F16 is technically superior to a bicycle, but if allyou want 
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> do is go to the corner shop, that technical superiority is not only a
> >> >> >> waste, but also a handicap.
>
> >> >> > HTML is simply technically superior. Sure, F15 is better than bicycle
> >> >> > but ridiculous. However, HTML is better than plain text in email is
> >> >> > not ridiculous. It is the standard the world uses by large, and people
> >> >> > want rich text in email. Wikipedia says the support for html email in
> >> >> > email programs is 97%.
>
> >> >> An utterly spurious statistic. Support for Finnish emails in
> >> >> email programs is probably closer to 100% than 97%, but that
> >> >> doesn't mean that everyone should be or wants to be using
> >> >> Finnish.
>
> >> > Ok. You used analogy to refute my reason. What is your real argument
> >> > that the ability to send/receive html formatted mail in emacs is not a
> >> > good thing?
>
> >> You are aparently too dense to see my real argument in
> >> the above, so there's little point in me putting forward
> >> a real argument on a different point. The incentive to
> >> play along with your trolling really isn't that great.
>
> > Let me be direct and honest. I don't see your point, and i was very
> > matter of fact, and asked what is your explicit reason for your
> > argument.
>
> You don't just not see my point, you are unable to understand
> what point I was addressing. Read, reread, and reread again.
> Eventually you may work out that the point I am addressing is
> your flawed argumentation style. (It says logical fallacy all
> over it, but I can't recall precisely what its common name would
> be at this time of night.)
>
> > Now you are calling me troll. It's ok. I'm used to it. No hard
> > feelings ok?
>
> Pity's not a hard feeling, so no hard feelings.
>
> > O, about your F15 vs bicycle analogy.
>
> I give up. You're painfully dense.

it's no use keep saying others are dense.

You have to give reasons. You gave none.

I gave reasons on how your F15 analogy is incorrect.

I also asked what's is your argument for your Finnish emails analogy.
And i explained that analogy by themselves doesn't work as a valid
reasoning.

  Xah
∑ http://xahlee.org/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]