I hate to say it, but for once I think Carroll has a ponit.
All that fancy looking formatting of text may look grand
on the sender's screen, but it's a waste of effort given how
it looks on many receiver's screens.
If one's mailer gives one the choice, one should choose plain text.
Carrol Cox wrote:
>I do wish posters would use plain text. Formatted text does weird things
>when one tries to copy it for replying, as well as producing weird
>effects itself. Here is how part of this post appeared to me:
>latter is not wholly distinct from Ferdinand Prince of <?xml:namespace
>prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Naples,
>the<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
>women are one woman, and the two sexes meet in Tiresias.”
>Moreover, this part of the post --
>= st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Naples, so all
>did not even appear on the screen until I copied it over to this post.
>In general, formatted text in e-mail is essentially a pain in the ass.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005