Dependency broken or my config?
Bill Davidsen
davidsen at tmr.com
Sat Apr 18 19:44:29 UTC 2009
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 02:11 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>> Clearly this mail system strips attachments, security over function.
>> Attachments on such a high-volume mailing list are also a huge waste of
>> bandwidth. Not everyone who's subscribed to the list will want to read it.
>> A link like the one you used in this message is the best solution, that way
>> people who actually want the file can get it and others don't have to
>> needlessly download it.
>
> Actually if they use a reasonable IMAP mailer (or a webmail system) they
> don't need to download it unless they want to read it. The problem with
> forbidding attachments is that people will tend to include the material
> in the body of the message, which rather defeats the purpose.
>
Past experience leads me to attach stuff like scripts to keep mailers from
playing with line length, tabs, etc. That's why I didn't put it in the body
either time, avoids errors.
> And I'm not sure attchments actually are forbidden here. I'm sure I've
> seen people posting screenshots now and again. Don't they count?
>
Maybe only certain thigns are permitted, who knows.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
More information about the users
mailing list