NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Attachments on Nav-L list
From: Frank Reed CT
Date: 2005 Aug 29, 05:32 EDT
From: Frank Reed CT
Date: 2005 Aug 29, 05:32 EDT
George H wrote: "Frank dismisses, with apparent contempt, the perfectly reasonable request that Dan Hogan has made of Nav-l members, that we should avoid sending attachments, useful though they would be. " Oy vey, George. Are you at it again?? I have no "contempt" for Dan Hogan's "perfectly reasonable request" (how perfect is it anyway?). And I stand by what I said, list members of long-standing have posted messages with attachments without getting slammed for it. Let's see... Fred Hebard sent a bunch of attachments last year --and you responded to them warmly, even asking at one point whether he could re-send one attachment in a format compatible with your old system [why were you so tolerant of attachments then but so angry about them now, George??]. Joel Jacobs has sent attachments... Richard Langley, too. There's nothing "horrible" about attachments. George H also wrote: "1. That those with dial-up connections are not plagued with unwanted messages with long download times, as Geoffrey Kolbe has made clear." Unless the user's e-mail reader is woefully archaic or the user simply hasn't investigated its tools, attachment downloads are OPTIONAL. They certainly are optional from the e-mail reader that I use. When I open an e-mail message with an attachment, it appears as a separate link. If I want it, I can download it. If I don't, I don't. Nice and simple and no problems with download times. Maybe YOU could help Geoffrey Kolbe with his issue?? And also: "2. More important, to minimise the risk of virus transmission. One respected member (at least) has stated that he discards all email messages that come with attachments, for that very reason." I know some people who won't open e-mail AT ALL outside of a known address book because they're paranoid about viruses. But that doesn't mean they are right. And I sure wouldn't want to "dumb down" all e-mail exchange to suit those poor mis-informed souls. Nonetheless, I respect their right to do as they choose. And we should all be aware that there are people with such irrational paranoias out there... And George, you wrote: "What's more, Frank encourages others to show the same indiscipline. I hope he will not succeed." George, you missed your calling in life. You would have made a great traffic cop! But there are no tickets on the Internet, so today... you are out of luck. And you wrote: "There are viable alternatives. If a poster has such information to send, he can ask interested parties to contact him and then send such wanted attachments off-list. Or he can post up his information on a website and invite listmembers to read it there." Sure. Why not? That's what I do. I always try to post to my web site when I have something of interest that's non-text. But that's my personal choice. If someone else finds an attachment more convenient, as Fred Hebard and Joel Jacobs and Richard Langley have in the past, I certainly would not fault them for it. Do you fault Fred or Joel or Richard for what they did? Perhaps more relevant, did you fault them at the time?? And George, you concluded: "If Frank objects to the list's rules, he should ask Dan Hogan if he is willing to alter them; not try subverting them himself." Don't be silly, George. I haven't attempted to subvert ANYTHING. Let's turn the tables -- when you asked Fred to re-post a message to the list using a tiff attachment instead of a pdf, was that subversion?? Of course not. No one would even remotely suggest such a thing. And you should not use such intolerant suggestions now. -FER 42.0N 87.7W, or 41.4N 72.1W. www.HistoricalAtlas.com/lunars