No Attachments Please
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Montgomery [SMTP:
rmonty@chemmgrs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 4:42 PM
To:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject: Re: Attachments and flaming
We have no problem with attachments. All messages with an unsolicited one go
straight to the wastepaper basket. On the other hand, I must admit we have a
cable connection and are not mobile, so we are not loaded with down
problems. However, we have picked up two or more viruses from attachments,
one of which required reformatting the hard drive to get rid of it.
I vote for a NO ATTACHMENTS POLICY
Dick Montgomery
20th Century Cooperative
http://www.chemmgrs.com
Audio Mailbox, Phone: 517 859-7512
"Our mission is to increase your sales."
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Edwards" <
stechina@SZONLINE.NET>
To: <
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 3:12 PM
Subject: Attachments and flaming
> I have just skimmed the "rules and regulations" I received for this list
and
> I confess I cannot see any prohibition of attachments. There are however
> many good reasons for banning them.
>
> For example, some systems do not cope well with attachments; some
companies
> do not allow them; it makes it too easy for people to dump stuff randomly
on
> a list without any real consideration for what they are doing; some people
> cannot read attachments encoded in certain ways thus resulting in them
> receiving garbage - lots and lots of garbage. I could go on and on.
>
> Very few if any lists allow attachments for these very good reasons. Many
> people (like me) are mobile professionals. Line speeds vary, my situation
> when downloading may vary. It is not only a matter of cost - I may be
> "borrowing" an office line in a remote location and it is embarrassing to
> have to sit there for ages clogging up someone else's line. In another
case
> I was just leaving from the office, my car and driver were waiting for me,
> and I had a guest in the car. Someone sent me an unsolicited attachment
> that took ages to download. Very annoying all round.
>
> Apart from listservs, general email etiquette is NO unsolicited
attachments!
>
> The problem of "flaming" - abusive emails - has been around since the
> beginning of the Internet. (The problem was around before that too but it
> was called something else.)
> There are those people who consider themselves internet mavens; there are
> some who are legends in their own minds.
> There no excuse for abusive, loutish behaviour or rude words on or off the
> Net. It doesn't make the world a better place. People who flame do
no-one
> any good. A quick informative note explaining the problems caused by an
> individual's behaviour usually works twice as well.
>
> (As an aside, I often wonder what would happen if some of the things I see
> posted on the Net were said in real life. I think a lot of Internet
bullies
> would be exposed as pathetic caricatures of themselves.)
>
> Having said all of that, I too have made mistakes, typed in anger and
> occasionally been rude.
>
> But, as my mother would say, two wrongs don't make a right. Attachments
are
> wrong, so is flaming.
>
> I think we need a ruling from the list manager/owner. If attachments are
> permitted I will leave.
>
>
> Best regards, Steve Edwards
>
steve@steglobal.com
> The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has
> taken place. - George Bernard Shaw
>