Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

['Georgina']

Hi All

Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
restricted to plain text only?

The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.

Gena

Have your say:
Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org

Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Personal Contact Details:
E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

I think that's OK since I don't use any formatting crap or anything that
requires html in my messages.
----- Original Message -----
From: "'Georgina'" <gena@gena-j.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All
>
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
>
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
>
> Gena
>
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

['Georgina']

Hi

Sorry, but you do.  It is messages of yours that I frequently don't read
as you send them in html format.

Gena



Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org

>I think that's OK since I don't use any formatting crap or anything that
>requires html in my messages.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "'Georgina'" <gena@gena-j.net>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
>Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
>> Hi All
>>
>> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
>> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
>> restricted to plain text only?
>>
>> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
>>
>> Gena
>>
>> Have your say:
>> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>>
>> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
>> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>>
>> Personal Contact Details:
>> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Shaun Oliver]

Ok,
here's my 2C worth.
I agree that all messages to the list should be in plain text format so s
to reduce header informatin and probably overhead to the list.

Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

Count me on Gena's side.  Email is text and should never be confused
with the web.  The web is not a synonym for The Internet, much as some
people would like to have you believe.

I vote for text only.  If you're a windows user, become an expert and
send in plain text, please!

Ann P.

-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Erik Heil]

I totally agree.  I vote for plain text instead of HTML.  If this becomes a
problem in the future, it wouldn't be hard at all to implement a perl script
that stripts all HTML tags from incoming messages.  Such a script would
obviously be implemented through Mailman.
Erik heil eheil@rcn.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann Parsons" <akp@eznet.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:52 PM
Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi all,
>
> Count me on Gena's side.  Email is text and should never be confused
> with the web.  The web is not a synonym for The Internet, much as some
> people would like to have you believe.
>
> I vote for text only.  If you're a windows user, become an expert and
> send in plain text, please!
>
> Ann P.
>
> --
> Ann K. Parsons
> email:  akp@eznet.net ICQ Number:  33006854
> WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."
JRRT
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Raul A. Gallegos]

Why should it be up to the listowner to do this.  Why can't people
just be responsible?

Is every one too lazy to change their client to plain text?

Erik Heil
said the following on Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:01:42PM -0400:
> I totally agree.  I vote for plain text instead of HTML.  If this becomes a
> problem in the future, it wouldn't be hard at all to implement a perl script
> that stripts all HTML tags from incoming messages.  Such a script would
> obviously be implemented through Mailman.
> Erik heil eheil@rcn.com
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ann Parsons" <akp@eznet.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:52 PM
> Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Count me on Gena's side.  Email is text and should never be confused
> > with the web.  The web is not a synonym for The Internet, much as some
> > people would like to have you believe.
> >
> > I vote for text only.  If you're a windows user, become an expert and
> > send in plain text, please!
> >
> > Ann P.
> >
> > --
> > Ann K. Parsons
> > email:  akp@eznet.net ICQ Number:  33006854
> > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."
> JRRT
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
If you perceive that there are four possible ways in which a procedure can
go wrong, and circumvent these, then a fifth way will promptly develop.
Raul A. Gallegos - http://www.asmodean.net

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Erik Heil]

Well, this is true, but it seems like a lot of people don't take
responsibility to ensure that their messages are in plain text.  The
scripting idea would only possibly be used as a last resort.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Raul A. Gallegos" <raul@asmodean.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Why should it be up to the listowner to do this.  Why can't people
> just be responsible?
>
> Is every one too lazy to change their client to plain text?
>
> Erik Heil
> said the following on Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:01:42PM -0400:
> > I totally agree.  I vote for plain text instead of HTML.  If this
becomes a
> > problem in the future, it wouldn't be hard at all to implement a perl
script
> > that stripts all HTML tags from incoming messages.  Such a script would
> > obviously be implemented through Mailman.
> > Erik heil eheil@rcn.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ann Parsons" <akp@eznet.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:52 PM
> > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Count me on Gena's side.  Email is text and should never be confused
> > > with the web.  The web is not a synonym for The Internet, much as some
> > > people would like to have you believe.
> > >
> > > I vote for text only.  If you're a windows user, become an expert and
> > > send in plain text, please!
> > >
> > > Ann P.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ann K. Parsons
> > > email:  akp@eznet.net ICQ Number:  33006854
> > > WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> > > "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are
lost."
> > JRRT
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> --
> If you perceive that there are four possible ways in which a procedure can
> go wrong, and circumvent these, then a fifth way will promptly develop.
> Raul A. Gallegos - http://www.asmodean.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Dan Murphy]

Well yes, I have to agree.  It should be the responsibility of the
sender to know at least *something about the client they are using and
how to make it perform correctly.
On Tue, 14 May 2002, Ann Parsons wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Count me on Gena's side.  Email is text and should never be confused
<snip>
> email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
> WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
> "All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Dan Murphy
mailto:mweeby@earthlink.net
Let us not look back in anger or forward
in fear, but around us in awareness.
                -- James Thurber

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All
> 
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
> 
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> 
> Gena
> 
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> 
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> 
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All
> 
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
> 
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> 
> Gena
> 
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> 
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> 
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Gregory Nowak]

Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one and the same?
Greg


On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet. 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway. 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > Hi All
> > 
> > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > restricted to plain text only?
> > 
> > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > 
> > Gena
> > 
> > Have your say:
> > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > 
> > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > 
> > Personal Contact Details:
> > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Raul A. Gallegos]

Who cares.

Bottom line it's up to the end user to do what he or she needs to do so
their computer is safe.  If that means don't use windows to avoid
viruses or if it means get a good antivirus program then do what you
need to do.

I mainly use linux to read and write emails but for those times that i
use windows i have an antivirus.

Wht I feel about html vs text emails is beside the point.


Gregory Nowak said the following on Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:28:03PM -0500:
> Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one and the same?
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet. 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > 
> > 
> > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway. 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > 
> > 
> > > Hi All
> > > 
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > 
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > 
> > > Gena
> > > 
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > 
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > 
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
If you perceive that there are four possible ways in which a procedure can
go wrong, and circumvent these, then a fifth way will promptly develop.
Raul A. Gallegos - http://www.asmodean.net

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart, recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow! Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your crappy rendition? Then what? 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one and the same?
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet. 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > 
> > 
> > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway. 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > 
> > 
> > > Hi All
> > > 
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > 
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > 
> > > Gena
> > > 
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > 
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > 
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[David Poehlman]

what dat? dot net?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to
do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet
destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart,
recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow!
Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your
crappy rendition? Then what?
----- Original Message -----
From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one
and the same?
> Greg
>
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their
messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain
text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There
should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I
wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in
html anyway.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > >
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > >
> > > Gena
> > >
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > >
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > >
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Dave. Yeah I'm refering to dot net also. There is a limit in what you can integrate into an aplication before it becomes too big and too buggy. This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> what dat? dot net?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to
> do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet
> destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart,
> recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow!
> Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your
> crappy rendition? Then what?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one
> and the same?
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their
> messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain
> text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There
> should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I
> wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in
> html anyway.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[David Poehlman]

no disagreement here.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi Dave. Yeah I'm refering to dot net also. There is a limit in what you
can integrate into an aplication before it becomes too big and too
buggy. This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> what dat? dot net?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to
> do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet
> destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart,
> recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow!
> Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your
> crappy rendition? Then what?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one
> and the same?
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their
> messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain
> text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated.
There
> should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I
> wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in
> html anyway.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Rich Caloggero]

Yes, restricting the list to text-only messages might be usful. Let's do it!

                    Rich

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: 14 May, 2002 10:12 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


no disagreement here.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi Dave. Yeah I'm refering to dot net also. There is a limit in what you
can integrate into an aplication before it becomes too big and too
buggy. This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> what dat? dot net?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to
> do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet
> destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart,
> recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow!
> Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your
> crappy rendition? Then what?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one
> and the same?
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their
> messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain
> text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated.
There
> should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I
> wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in
> html anyway.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

That's a good idea anyway, but this won't prevent virus spreading.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rich Caloggero" <rjc@MIT.EDU>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Yes, restricting the list to text-only messages might be usful. Let's do it!

                    Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: 14 May, 2002 10:12 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


no disagreement here.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi Dave. Yeah I'm refering to dot net also. There is a limit in what you
can integrate into an aplication before it becomes too big and too
buggy. This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> what dat? dot net?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi Greg. Yes pretty much I believe it was their idea. All they want to
> do is combine everything into one i.e., html into e-mail, internet
> destroyer bolted into w98. They also think winblows is so smart,
> recognizing <aHref> and formulating urls into hyperlinks? Wow!
> Impressive! What if I want to read the text of that link and not your
> crappy rendition? Then what?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory Nowak <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Wasn't it originally macroslop's idea that html and e-mail were one
> and the same?
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:54:49PM -0400, Igor Gueths wrote:
> > > Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their
> messages to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain
> text, I wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated.
There
> should be a difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I
> wouldn't mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in
> html anyway.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
> > > Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup







_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Ann Parsons]

Hi all,

Yes, it was the advertisers and marketers of Windows who made The
Internet and The Web synonymous.  They aren't.  But because of all the
hype, people think they are.

Ann P.
 
-- 
			Ann K. Parsons  
email:  akp@eznet.net 			ICQ Number:  33006854
WEB SITE:  http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter.  Not all those who wander are lost."  JRRT

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Ok, my messages are now in plane text.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi all. I think that it is peoples' responsibility to change their messages
to plain text, but even if the list were restricted to plain text, I
wouldn't mind. Also, e-mail and html should be separated. There should be a
difference between the web and the rest of the internet.
----- Original Message -----
From: Igor Gueths <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi. I think that this method is both better and more standard. I wouldn't
mind if messages were restricted to text. I don't transmit in html anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: 'Georgina' <gena@gena-j.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All
>
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
>
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
>
> Gena
>
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Dan Murphy]

Well I don't have a problem with it, since I don't use HTML mail
anyway.  Even when I am using Outlook or any other Windows mail
client, I always make sure it is set to send plain text only.
I was looking at this very list yesterday with Calipso, and one of
those pesky worms got me, but fortunately Norton grabbed and
quaranteened it.
On Tue, 14 May 2002, 'Georgina' wrote:

> Hi All
>
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
>
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
>
> Gena
>
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Dan Murphy
mailto:mweeby@earthlink.net
Let us not look back in anger or forward
in fear, but around us in awareness.
                -- James Thurber

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Steve Holmes]

Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
windows mailers on the list; so go for it!

On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> Hi All
> 
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?
> 
> The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> 
> Gena
> 
> Have your say:
> Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> 
> Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> 
> Personal Contact Details:
> E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Charles Hallenbeck]

I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
real problem.

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:

> Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > Hi All
> >
> > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > restricted to plain text only?
> >
> > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> >
> > Gena
> >
> > Have your say:
> > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> >
> > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> >
> > Personal Contact Details:
> > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Erik Heil]

What about Java applets that are embedded in HTML e-mail?  Or ActiveX
controls?  These can cause a myriad of problems for users IMHO.  Whether
their client or server-side doesn't make a difference either.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


>
> I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> real problem.
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
>
> > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > >
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > >
> > > Gena
> > >
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > >
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > >
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Granted, those are problems.

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Erik Heil wrote:

> What about Java applets that are embedded in HTML e-mail?  Or ActiveX
> controls?  These can cause a myriad of problems for users IMHO.  Whether
> their client or server-side doesn't make a difference either.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> >
> > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > real problem.
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> >
> > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Erik Heil]

yean and now their's Dot net.  GRRRRR.  At leas their's some security
settings, but I don't know how effective they are since I don't have any Dot
net applications on this box.  Wouldn't count on it based on Microsoft's
track record. Original Message -----
From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Granted, those are problems.
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Erik Heil wrote:
>
> > What about Java applets that are embedded in HTML e-mail?  Or ActiveX
> > controls?  These can cause a myriad of problems for users IMHO.  Whether
> > their client or server-side doesn't make a difference either.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:16 AM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > real problem.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
blockage
> > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still
use
> > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > >
> > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gena
> > > > >
> > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Kerry Hoath]

Chuck I should point out that certain versions 
of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
except to say that there are dangers in html;
more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
exist as well.
I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
I encourage people to set their look out distress
settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a message
in the format it was received in.

Regards, Kerry.
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> 
> I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> real problem.
> 
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> 
> > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > >
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > >
> > > Gena
> > >
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > >
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > >
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> -- 
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or  kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Hi Kerry,

No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
against viruses.

Chuck


On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
> and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> except to say that there are dangers in html;
> more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> exist as well.
> I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> I encourage people to set their look out distress
> settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a message
> in the format it was received in.
>
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > real problem.
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> >
> > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days back
when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late 80's
early 90's). Those were the good days!

Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Hi Kerry,
>
> No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> against viruses.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
>
> > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
> > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > exist as well.
> > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a message
> > in the format it was received in.
> >
> > Regards, Kerry.
> > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >
> > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > real problem.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > >
> > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gena
> > > > >
> > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Hi All,
I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in pieces.
How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to stop
this?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days back
> when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late 80's
> early 90's). Those were the good days!
>
> Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> > Hi Kerry,
> >
> > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > against viruses.
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> >
> > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
elements
> > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > exist as well.
> > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
message
> > > in the format it was received in.
> > >
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > real problem.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
blockage
> > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still
use
> > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gena
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All,
> I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in pieces.
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to stop
> this?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days back
> > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late 80's
> > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> >
> > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > >
> > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > against viruses.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> elements
> > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > exist as well.
> > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > real problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> blockage
> > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still
> use
> > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> Windows
> > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> 144169465
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
right tab in those huge properties forms.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All,
> I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
pieces.
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
stop
> this?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
back
> > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
80's
> > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> >
> > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > >
> > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > against viruses.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> elements
> > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > exist as well.
> > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > real problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
been
> > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> blockage
> > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
still
> use
> > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> Windows
> > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
messages
> > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> 144169465
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Ameer Armaly]

Hi all.
What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
(which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
/etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
software.
That's just my 2 cents.
Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
will be glad to support my point.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
> right tab in those huge properties forms.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
> about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi All,
> > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> pieces.
> > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
files?
> > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
> stop
> > this?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
> back
> > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> 80's
> > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > >
> > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > >
> > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > against viruses.
> > > >
> > > > Chuck
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > elements
> > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
messages
> > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
a
> > message
> > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
messages
> > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> been
> > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
an
> > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> > blockage
> > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> still
> > use
> > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > Windows
> > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> messages
> > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > 144169465
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

It would depend on the file.  I find the php.ini file to be hell to
configure only because of the comments.  Get rid of those, and it's fine.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
"print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have
to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor
a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

You're absolutely right.
I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely has
problems.
It is a lot much harder to use than Windows.

If it would be  such a great OS, more people would use Linux not Windows.
And in addition, it is free.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi all.
What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
(which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
/etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
software.
That's just my 2 cents.
Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
will be glad to support my point.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
> right tab in those huge properties forms.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
> about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi All,
> > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> pieces.
> > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
files?
> > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
> stop
> > this?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
> back
> > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> 80's
> > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > >
> > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > >
> > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > against viruses.
> > > >
> > > > Chuck
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > elements
> > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
messages
> > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
a
> > message
> > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
messages
> > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> been
> > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
an
> > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> > blockage
> > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> still
> > use
> > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > Windows
> > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> messages
> > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > 144169465
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

I think linux would be widely used if a windowslike gui was developed for
it, so the average person could use it.  Also getting the message out that
linux isn't just for developers or server admins would help.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> You're absolutely right.
> I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely has
> problems.
> It is a lot much harder to use than Windows.
>
> If it would be  such a great OS, more people would use Linux not Windows.
> And in addition, it is free.
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
"print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have
to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor
a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Right again, but until a GUI will be accessible for the blind in the same
conditions like in Windows (without requiring a hardware sinthesizer which
is very expensive comparing it with a software one, Linux OS will stay
behind, for the blind community, of course.

It will be a good idea to start developing that graphical interface with
accessibility in mind, something like the Microsoft active accessibility.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


I think linux would be widely used if a windowslike gui was developed for
it, so the average person could use it.  Also getting the message out that
linux isn't just for developers or server admins would help.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> You're absolutely right.
> I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely has
> problems.
> It is a lot much harder to use than Windows.
>
> If it would be  such a great OS, more people would use Linux not Windows.
> And in addition, it is free.
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
"print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have
to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor
a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Erik Heil]

Actually, Gnome 2.0 will have accessibility built in, as in support for
braille displays and software synths I think.  I also believe that its safe
to say that they might use Festival which is the best open-source software
synth available out there.  I know for a fact that I'll be really excited to
see what Gnome is like and also KDE 3.x or whatever version will have such
accessibility build in.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Right again, but until a GUI will be accessible for the blind in the same
> conditions like in Windows (without requiring a hardware sinthesizer which
> is very expensive comparing it with a software one, Linux OS will stay
> behind, for the blind community, of course.
>
> It will be a good idea to start developing that graphical interface with
> accessibility in mind, something like the Microsoft active accessibility.
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> I think linux would be widely used if a windowslike gui was developed for
> it, so the average person could use it.  Also getting the message out that
> linux isn't just for developers or server admins would help.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > You're absolutely right.
> > I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely
has
> > problems.
> > It is a lot much harder to use than Windows.
> >
> > If it would be  such a great OS, more people would use Linux not
Windows.
> > And in addition, it is free.
> >
> > Teddy,
> > orasnita@home.ro
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi all.
> > What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config
files
> > (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in
the
> > sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> > confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of
there
> > confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> > that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
> second
> > look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> > you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
> why
> > should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
> "print"
> > command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> > these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> > should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> > /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
> in
> > email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than
have
> to
> > copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
> anyway.
> > It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't
interpret
> > java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
> Also,
> > you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> > right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> > have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> > another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile
support
> > into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from
beeing
> > hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila!
my
> > network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> > profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial
goal,
> > so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
> is
> > working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make
good
> > software.
> > That's just my 2 cents.
> > Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> > windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
> who
> > will be glad to support my point.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
> the
> > > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
> hate
> > > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > > pieces.
> > > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> > files?
> > > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
> to
> > > stop
> > > > this?
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
> days
> > > back
> > > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail
(late
> > > 80's
> > > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > > >
> > > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > > against viruses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > > elements
> > > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> > messages
> > > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux
dangers
> > > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text
section,
> > > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
> text
> > > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
> to
> > a
> > > > message
> > > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> > messages
> > > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are
the
> > > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really
haven't
> > > been
> > > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
> was
> > an
> > > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would
favor
> a
> > > > blockage
> > > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some
people
> > > still
> > > > use
> > > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina'
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to
transmit
> > > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > > messages
> > > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online
www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Yes that's great.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Heil" <eheil@rcn.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Actually, Gnome 2.0 will have accessibility built in, as in support for
braille displays and software synths I think.  I also believe that its safe
to say that they might use Festival which is the best open-source software
synth available out there.  I know for a fact that I'll be really excited to
see what Gnome is like and also KDE 3.x or whatever version will have such
accessibility build in.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Right again, but until a GUI will be accessible for the blind in the same
> conditions like in Windows (without requiring a hardware sinthesizer which
> is very expensive comparing it with a software one, Linux OS will stay
> behind, for the blind community, of course.
>
> It will be a good idea to start developing that graphical interface with
> accessibility in mind, something like the Microsoft active accessibility.
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> I think linux would be widely used if a windowslike gui was developed for
> it, so the average person could use it.  Also getting the message out that
> linux isn't just for developers or server admins would help.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > You're absolutely right.
> > I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely
has
> > problems.
> > It is a lot much harder to use than Windows.
> >
> > If it would be  such a great OS, more people would use Linux not
Windows.
> > And in addition, it is free.
> >
> > Teddy,
> > orasnita@home.ro
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly@hotmail.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi all.
> > What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config
files
> > (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in
the
> > sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> > confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of
there
> > confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> > that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
> second
> > look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> > you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
> why
> > should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
> "print"
> > command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> > these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> > should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> > /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
> in
> > email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than
have
> to
> > copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
> anyway.
> > It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't
interpret
> > java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
> Also,
> > you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> > right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> > have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> > another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile
support
> > into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from
beeing
> > hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila!
my
> > network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> > profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial
goal,
> > so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
> is
> > working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make
good
> > software.
> > That's just my 2 cents.
> > Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> > windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
> who
> > will be glad to support my point.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
> the
> > > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
> hate
> > > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > > pieces.
> > > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> > files?
> > > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
> to
> > > stop
> > > > this?
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
> days
> > > back
> > > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail
(late
> > > 80's
> > > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > > >
> > > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > > against viruses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > > elements
> > > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> > messages
> > > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux
dangers
> > > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text
section,
> > > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
> text
> > > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
> to
> > a
> > > > message
> > > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> > messages
> > > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are
the
> > > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really
haven't
> > > been
> > > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
> was
> > an
> > > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would
favor
> a
> > > > blockage
> > > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some
people
> > > still
> > > > use
> > > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina'
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to
transmit
> > > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > > messages
> > > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online
www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Kerry Hoath]

Please do us a favour and unsubscribe or go
expound the virtues of windows to people who have chosen to run it.
We don't care who has converted back to Windows or why;
we simply run Linux because it does what we want it to; we
have the skill to configure it and it works
for us. Also it doesn't hurt our pocketbook.
Yes Windows is easy to use; but I have the skill knowledge
and ability to use the power that Linux puts in my hands.
You choose not to use LInux for your own reasons, and that is your choice.
Why pray; are you still subscribed to the speakup list?

Regards, Kerry.
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:15:05PM -0400, Ameer Armaly wrote:
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 

-- 
Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or  kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Oh, please calm down.
You haven't reply to my message, but I think I am in the same situation.

I am subscribed because I use Linux and Windows and I don't know Linux.
I want to learn it first. But I think it is something stupid to say that an
Operating system is better than another, or a programming language is better
than another, or ...

They all are good for a task.
If you want to do graphic design and multimedia editing, Windows is better
than Linux, but if you want to do web site management, Linux is better.
We should take what is better from all OS's, and not to say that "my system
is good, yours is bad."

Just because this is a list for Linux users doesn't mean that all users
should think that Linux is the best system in the world in all the fields.

Best regards.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Please do us a favour and unsubscribe or go
expound the virtues of windows to people who have chosen to run it.
We don't care who has converted back to Windows or why;
we simply run Linux because it does what we want it to; we
have the skill to configure it and it works
for us. Also it doesn't hurt our pocketbook.
Yes Windows is easy to use; but I have the skill knowledge
and ability to use the power that Linux puts in my hands.
You choose not to use LInux for your own reasons, and that is your choice.
Why pray; are you still subscribed to the speakup list?

Regards, Kerry.
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:15:05PM -0400, Ameer Armaly wrote:
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
"print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have
to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor
a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

--
Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or
kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Steve Holmes]

My blood is boiling now!

Ms - good software?  I don't think so!!! I got three "illegal
operations last night in the space of a few minutes and I had to
reboot my computer every time!

Linux developers don't get paid so no incentive to write good software
- they write crappy software?   WRONG!  Free software is far more
innovative and grows faster than any of the proprietary commercial
stuff out there.

The comments below reflect the MS line all the way! "Free software is
a threat to our existance" and "Everyone should use secret proprietary
software that they cannot fix or modify even if they know how and want
to>"

Sorry, this has nothing to do with Speakup, a very fine and *FREE*
screen to help blind people use that great free Linux operating
system.  

BTW, I forgot to mention up there that my Linux environment has
*NEVER* crashed - rock solid!!!

On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:15:05PM -0400, Ameer Armaly wrote:
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Yes you're right.
However, in Windows 2000 you won't see so many Illegal operation error
messages.
In fact, you won't see anyone. You will see another error. <smile>
But BTW,  I had some errors in Linux also, when trying to upload a file with
SSH. So Linux is not 100% stable either.

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Holmes" <steve@holmesgrown.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


My blood is boiling now!

Ms - good software?  I don't think so!!! I got three "illegal
operations last night in the space of a few minutes and I had to
reboot my computer every time!

Linux developers don't get paid so no incentive to write good software
- they write crappy software?   WRONG!  Free software is far more
innovative and grows faster than any of the proprietary commercial
stuff out there.

The comments below reflect the MS line all the way! "Free software is
a threat to our existance" and "Everyone should use secret proprietary
software that they cannot fix or modify even if they know how and want
to>"

Sorry, this has nothing to do with Speakup, a very fine and *FREE*
screen to help blind people use that great free Linux operating
system.

BTW, I forgot to mention up there that my Linux environment has
*NEVER* crashed - rock solid!!!

On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 08:15:05PM -0400, Ameer Armaly wrote:
> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a
second
> look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also,
why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple
"print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html
in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have
to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx
anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.
Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who
is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
> That's just my 2 cents.
> Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine,
who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find
the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I
hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way
to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the
days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain
text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply
to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it
was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor
a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Toby Fisher]

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Octavian Rasnita wrote:

> Yes you're right.
> However, in Windows 2000 you won't see so many Illegal operation error
> messages.

That maybe the case, but for JAWS users, that's an additional $500 or so,
without the cost of the operating system itself.

Cheers.

-- 
Toby Fisher	Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272	Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Only 400 dollars in addition (if you live in some countries where it is
illegal to steal the key, and if you want to be legal :-)

Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Toby Fisher" <toby_fisher@bigfoot.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 5:42 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


On Fri, 17 May 2002, Octavian Rasnita wrote:

> Yes you're right.
> However, in Windows 2000 you won't see so many Illegal operation error
> messages.

That maybe the case, but for JAWS users, that's an additional $500 or so,
without the cost of the operating system itself.

Cheers.

--
Toby Fisher Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean... There
are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more on
the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toby Fisher" <toby_fisher@bigfoot.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> On Fri, 17 May 2002, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
>
> > Yes you're right.
> > However, in Windows 2000 you won't see so many Illegal operation error
> > messages.
>
> That maybe the case, but for JAWS users, that's an additional $500 or so,
> without the cost of the operating system itself.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
> Toby Fisher Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
> Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
> ICQ: #61744808
>    Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
>    See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Shaun Oliver]

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Alex Snow wrote:

> Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean... There
> are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more on
> the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.
ok, I'll tell ya what,
you copy me an nt authorization diskette for jfw and I'll use win2k and/or
xp just for the fun of it.
Shaun..

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

This demonstrates how much you like Microcrap grin!

Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> On Fri, 17 May 2002, Alex Snow wrote:
>
> > Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean... There
> > are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more on
> > the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.
> ok, I'll tell ya what,
> you copy me an nt authorization diskette for jfw and I'll use win2k and/or
> xp just for the fun of it.
> Shaun..
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

I would if I had one.  Thats what I'm looking for also.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shaun Oliver" <shaun_oliver@optusnet.com.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> On Fri, 17 May 2002, Alex Snow wrote:
>
> > Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean...
There
> > are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more
on
> > the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.
> ok, I'll tell ya what,
> you copy me an nt authorization diskette for jfw and I'll use win2k and/or
> xp just for the fun of it.
> Shaun..
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Toby Fisher]

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Alex Snow wrote:

> Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean... There
> are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more on
> the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.

Yes, but my statement holds true for the average user, because everyone
says that that's the only way it can be done.

Cheers.

-- 
Toby Fisher	Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272	Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Anyways, windows xp home is only $99, and that's pretty cheap for a ms
product.  I don't know anyone who'd want home though.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toby Fisher" <toby_fisher@bigfoot.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> On Fri, 17 May 2002, Alex Snow wrote:
>
> > Well... You don't have to pay for the OS if you know what I mean...
There
> > are copies of winblows 2000 floating around here, and there's even more
on
> > the filesharing networks like gnutella or kazaa.
>
> Yes, but my statement holds true for the average user, because everyone
> says that that's the only way it can be done.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
> Toby Fisher Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
> Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
> ICQ: #61744808
>    Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
>    See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Shaun Oliver]

please note: comments are in the message below.

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Ameer Armaly wrote:

> Hi all.
> What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
> (which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
> sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
> confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
> confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
> that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
>
look.
First of all, the config files are commented to aid in not only debugging
but also setting up the process one wishes to run.
As for the confusingness of drivers, what's so confusing about that? if
you stripped microsoft's windows operating system down to it's basic
components, you'll find that it's more than likely unix based. This is
what shits me about people. They whinge and whine about "I'm being screwed
by microsoft! My Screen Reader won't do this or that!"
for god sakes people if you don't want to move away from windows because
you're too scared you'll break something, then what in the world are you
doing here?

 My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
> you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
> should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
> command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
> these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
> should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
> /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
> email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
> copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
> It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
> java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
> you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
> right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
> have a sound card, and it just does the rest.

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! in the case of the sb_live you still need to install
creative's own drivers for full functionality of the card.
What's wrong with cat as apposed to print? who cares how you do things
under GNU/Linux just as long as you can get the job done! JESUS!
And what about lynx? instead of posting this diotribe to the list, why
don't you get off your ass and code the damned support in? oh and how many
back doors does internet explorer have? how many times can you safely say
that lynx has seg-faulted in one session? And can you be serious about
html in email?
Haven't you learned a thing? with pine you can specify how you deal with
urls in email messages and not only that what bloody browser to use,
for christ sakes man!

  Also, home networking is
> another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
> into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
> hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
> network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
> profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
> so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
> working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
> software.
Oh I see a stooge ladies and gentlemen, we have a bloody microslop stooge
in our midst.
home networking under Gnu/Linux is easy. sure you could compile the
support in but why bother when all you need to do is build only for what
you have and what you need and then if you're as smart a person as you
think you are, you configure the network using the various shell scripts
that are on offer.
And as for being hacked, that's just as much an issue under windows as
under linux. difference is linux is totally customizable you can set
things up exactly how you want from the ground up. can you do that with
windows? you bloody fool, of course you can't.
Oh so the people that write code for GNU/LInux write crappy software? I've
never seen any evidence of it,
my god man do us all a favour and don't try to convert us back to
proprietory crap and don't bother trying to tell us that microsoft code
good software cause it's just not true. Once microsoft have a good thing,
they bugger it up.

 > That's
just my 2 cents. > Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
> windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
> will be glad to support my point.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
> > right tab in those huge properties forms.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
> > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
> > pieces.
> > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
> files?
> > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
> > stop
> > > this?
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
> > back
> > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
> > 80's
> > > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> > > >
> > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Kerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > > > against viruses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> > > elements
> > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
> messages
> > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > > > exist as well.
> > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
> a
> > > message
> > > > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
> messages
> > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > > > real problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
> > been
> > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
> an
> > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> > > blockage
> > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
> > still
> > > use
> > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> > > Windows
> > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
> > messages
> > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> > > 144169465
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[TALMAGE]

Hi,

Wow, what a nice bit of PR for MicroSoft.  Trying to get a job working with
your friend eh?

Well I know I'd much rather check a confusing check box, with absolutely no
explanation of what it does.

I also have to say, I love those arbitrary statements like everybody knows
it, Windows rules...'
Who is this everybody you refer to?  Has anybody mentioned this to Apple?

You mention your friend at MS agreeing with you on this.  Well that
revelation comes under the category of da!
As far as the wonderful print command in MS-DOS, are you talking about the
print command Microsoft ditched about 5 versions ago?

You go on to mention all the things you need to do to keep from getting
hacked in Linux.  These steps are the ones you should be doing in Windows,
but can't because MS won't let you.  This is unique, I think it is the
first time I've ever heard of anyone singing the praises of Windows
security over Linux on systems that have been set up correctly.  That is
aside from MS of course.
The motto of Windows security should be 'ignorance is bliss.'  Try finding
out what app is accessing the Internet at any specific time in Windows.
Good luck!

If you have never had any trouble with the sound card driver in Windows you
should consider yourself lucky!  Sound card drivers and modem drivers have
been the bain of my existence at times in Windows.  I particularly enjoy it
when Windows plug and play decides it wants to assign my sound card to the
same interrupt as 3 or 4 other devices.  With 1 of the other devices not
wanting to play nicely with my sound card or modem.  These 3rd party
drivers are of course always so well written because of Microsoft's well
known efforts to make standards and design features available to other
developers.  
Right!  If you believe that, I have a bridge for sale you might be
interested in.

Regarding the crappy software, please get real.  When I use my Windows
system I get the wonderful benefit of seeing that dazzling blue screen of
death at least 2 or 3 times a day, or at least I would get to enjoy its
shades of blue if I could see it.  
Ask a linux user the last time their system crashed.  They would probably
have to consult the calendar, and an old one at that.

Dave

At 08:15 PM 5/15/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi all.
>What would you rather do.  Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files
>(which make no sense att all!).  Everybody knows it, windows rules in the
>sense that the non-programer can use it.  It also isn't dependant on
>confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there
>confusingness.  now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense
>that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a second
>look.  My friend at ms agrees.  He used linux for 4 years, and says that
>you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago.  Also, why
>should you have to use cat to print files.  There should be a simple "print"
>command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and
>these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome.  I
>should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print
>/etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat.  Also, why not have html in
>email.  It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have to
>copy it and past it into lynx.  Also, why should we have to use lynx anyway.
>It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap.  It can't interpret
>java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can.  Also,
>you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the
>right alsa drivers for your soundcard.  In windows, you just tell it you
>have a sound card, and it just does the rest.  Also, home networking is
>another issue that linux needs to improve on.  You need to compile support
>into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing
>hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my
>network was setup!  Now why can't linux be so easy?  Because there's no
>profit for the people who are working on it.  They have no financial goal,
>so most of them make really crappy software.  On the other hand, ms, who is
>working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good
>software.
>That's just my 2 cents.
>Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown
>windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, who
>will be glad to support my point.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
>To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM
>Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
>> If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find the
>> right tab in those huge properties forms.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
>> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM
>> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>>
>>
>> Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I hate
>> about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Alex Snow <alex_snow@gmx.net>
>> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
>> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>>
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
>> pieces.
>> > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
>files?
>> > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
>> stop
>> > this?
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
>> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>> >
>> >
>> > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
>> back
>> > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
>> 80's
>> > > early 90's). Those were the good days!
>> > >
>> > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi Kerry,
>> > > >
>> > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
>> > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
>> > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
>> > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
>> > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
>> > > > against viruses.
>> > > >
>> > > > Chuck
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
>> > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
>> > elements
>> > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
>> > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html
>messages
>> > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
>> > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
>> > > > > exist as well.
>> > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
>> > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
>> > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
>> > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
>> > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
>> > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to
>a
>> > message
>> > > > > in the format it was received in.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards, Kerry.
>> > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck
>wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html
>messages
>> > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
>> > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
>> > > > > > real problem.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
>> been
>> > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was
>an
>> > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
>> > blockage
>> > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
>> still
>> > use
>> > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Hi All
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
>> > Windows
>> > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
>> messages
>> > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Gena
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Have your say:
>> > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
>> > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
>> > > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
>> > 144169465
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
>> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
>> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
>> > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
>> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
>> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Speakup mailing list
>> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Speakup mailing list
>> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Speakup mailing list
>> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

anyone else?

[Cecil H. Whitley]

Hi,
At this moment my chain has been severly jerked.  So here's the scenario....
I went in on april 23 to find a new car.  Got pre-approved and everything.
Found a car that both me and my wife liked.  Traded in my old car and we
drove the new one home.  I signed the contract.  The title to the previous
car was in my name, it was registered in my name, and it was insured in my
name.  On the new car loan capitol 1 (the underwriter) is attempting to
require that I have a co-signer with a drivers license.  The car will be
registered in my name, insured in my name and titled in my name (once it is
paid for), so why should I be required to have a person cosign the loan
simply because they have a license?  I can within the limits of my insurance
policy have anyone I desire to drive the vehicle do so.  I'm not making any
sort of commentment that only she will drive it.

So, has anyone else run into this?  Is this not a discriminatory requirement
since it has nothing to do with my (or hers) ability to pay?  Bottom line,
we are a single income family (mine) and so having her cosign isn't going to
improve their ability to collect.

Comments welcome!

Cecil

Re: anyone else?

[Cecil H. Whitley]

Hi,
It certainly shows that it wasn't spell checked.  Forgive me, i'm still
enraged.
Regards,
Cecil

Re: anyone else?

[David Poehlman]

this is deffinitely over turnable.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cecil H. Whitley" <cwhitley@ec.rr.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:20 PM
Subject: anyone else?


Hi,
At this moment my chain has been severly jerked.  So here's the
scenario....
I went in on april 23 to find a new car.  Got pre-approved and
everything.
Found a car that both me and my wife liked.  Traded in my old car and we
drove the new one home.  I signed the contract.  The title to the
previous
car was in my name, it was registered in my name, and it was insured in
my
name.  On the new car loan capitol 1 (the underwriter) is attempting to
require that I have a co-signer with a drivers license.  The car will be
registered in my name, insured in my name and titled in my name (once it
is
paid for), so why should I be required to have a person cosign the loan
simply because they have a license?  I can within the limits of my
insurance
policy have anyone I desire to drive the vehicle do so.  I'm not making
any
sort of commentment that only she will drive it.

So, has anyone else run into this?  Is this not a discriminatory
requirement
since it has nothing to do with my (or hers) ability to pay?  Bottom
line,
we are a single income family (mine) and so having her cosign isn't
going to
improve their ability to collect.

Comments welcome!

Cecil


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: anyone else?

[jwantz]

Hi Cecil,
Yes, it is discriminatory.  I have a good friend who is blind and has a 
sighted wife that ran into exactly this problem.
Jeez!!!

     Jim Wantz WB0TFK
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Cecil 
H. Whitley wrote:

> Hi,
> At this moment my chain has been severly jerked.  So here's the scenario....
> I went in on april 23 to find a new car.  Got pre-approved and everything.
> Found a car that both me and my wife liked.  Traded in my old car and we
> drove the new one home.  I signed the contract.  The title to the previous
> car was in my name, it was registered in my name, and it was insured in my
> name.  On the new car loan capitol 1 (the underwriter) is attempting to
> require that I have a co-signer with a drivers license.  The car will be
> registered in my name, insured in my name and titled in my name (once it is
> paid for), so why should I be required to have a person cosign the loan
> simply because they have a license?  I can within the limits of my insurance
> policy have anyone I desire to drive the vehicle do so.  I'm not making any
> sort of commentment that only she will drive it.
> 
> So, has anyone else run into this?  Is this not a discriminatory requirement
> since it has nothing to do with my (or hers) ability to pay?  Bottom line,
> we are a single income family (mine) and so having her cosign isn't going to
> improve their ability to collect.
> 
> Comments welcome!
> 
> Cecil
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Ameer Armaly]

Yah.  Namely, use pine.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi All,
> I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
pieces.
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
stop
> this?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
back
> > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
80's
> > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> >
> > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > >
> > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > against viruses.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> elements
> > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > exist as well.
> > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > real problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
been
> > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> blockage
> > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
still
> use
> > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> Windows
> > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
messages
> > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> 144169465
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

If you have Internet Explorer and Outlook Express 6 with all the necessary
patches, if a virus will try to automaticly open itself, Outlook Express
will ask you if you want to open it or save it to hard disk.
You can choose to save to hard disk, but if you also have Norton, it will
clean the file, or move it to quarantine.

If you want to disable the Active X, go to Tools menu, choose options, go to
privacy tab, choose "restricted sites from those radio buttons.
Then go to Control Panel/Internet Options/Privacy page, select restricted
sites and change the settings for that area for not to have Active X, or
other things you want.


Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Hi All,
I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in pieces.
How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to stop
this?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days back
> when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late 80's
> early 90's). Those were the good days!
>
> Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> > Hi Kerry,
> >
> > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > against viruses.
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> >
> > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
elements
> > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > exist as well.
> > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
message
> > > in the format it was received in.
> > >
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > real problem.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
blockage
> > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still
use
> > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gena
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Yeah my version 5.5 does that, only after the virus has activated!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> If you have Internet Explorer and Outlook Express 6 with all the necessary
> patches, if a virus will try to automaticly open itself, Outlook Express
> will ask you if you want to open it or save it to hard disk.
> You can choose to save to hard disk, but if you also have Norton, it will
> clean the file, or move it to quarantine.
>
> If you want to disable the Active X, go to Tools menu, choose options, go
to
> privacy tab, choose "restricted sites from those radio buttons.
> Then go to Control Panel/Internet Options/Privacy page, select restricted
> sites and change the settings for that area for not to have Active X, or
> other things you want.
>
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi All,
> I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
pieces.
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
stop
> this?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
back
> > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
80's
> > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> >
> > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > >
> > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > against viruses.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> elements
> > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > exist as well.
> > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > real problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
been
> > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> blockage
> > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
still
> use
> > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> Windows
> > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
messages
> > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> 144169465
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Octavian Rasnita]

Try installing OE 6 or the patches for 5.5.
Teddy,
orasnita@home.ro

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


Yeah my version 5.5 does that, only after the virus has activated!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@home.ro>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> If you have Internet Explorer and Outlook Express 6 with all the necessary
> patches, if a virus will try to automaticly open itself, Outlook Express
> will ask you if you want to open it or save it to hard disk.
> You can choose to save to hard disk, but if you also have Norton, it will
> clean the file, or move it to quarantine.
>
> If you want to disable the Active X, go to Tools menu, choose options, go
to
> privacy tab, choose "restricted sites from those radio buttons.
> Then go to Control Panel/Internet Options/Privacy page, select restricted
> sites and change the settings for that area for not to have Active X, or
> other things you want.
>
>
> Teddy,
> orasnita@home.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow@gmx.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> Hi All,
> I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in
pieces.
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
stop
> this?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@attbi.com>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
>
>
> > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the days
back
> > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late
80's
> > early 90's). Those were the good days!
> >
> > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Kerry,
> > >
> > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if
> > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many
> > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other
> > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without
> > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection
> > > against viruses.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
> elements
> > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > > exist as well.
> > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > > > in the format it was received in.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > > real problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't
been
> > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
> blockage
> > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people
still
> use
> > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
> Windows
> > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list
messages
> > > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gena
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
> 144169465
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Shaun Oliver]

SNIP
> How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the files?
> Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to stop
> this?

Norton's anti-virus 2002 picks up the virus or malicious code before you
even open your email.
I guess this is due to all those people who don't know any better out
there opening their email and wondering why their machine dies.
Shaun.

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Oh yeah, and my favorite one is "but I new the sender's email... they
wouldn't send me an email like that!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shaun Oliver" <shaun_oliver@optusnet.com.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> SNIP
> > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the
files?
> > Norton catches them only after the file is opened.  Is there any way to
stop
> > this?
>
> Norton's anti-virus 2002 picks up the virus or malicious code before you
> even open your email.
> I guess this is due to all those people who don't know any better out
> there opening their email and wondering why their machine dies.
> Shaun.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

I have set outlook distress on my winblows box to only send text messages,
but to reply to messages in the format they were receved in.  I have no need
for html mail now, and probably never will.  I don't need to do anything
special with the formatting, since I cant see it anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
> and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> except to say that there are dangers in html;
> more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> exist as well.
> I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> I encourage people to set their look out distress
> settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
message
> in the format it was received in.
>
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> >
> > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > real problem.
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> >
> > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
> Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or
kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Gregory Nowak]

Ok. But, you know what they say, "never say never" (smile).
Greg


On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:01:03PM -0400, Alex Snow wrote:
> I have set outlook distress on my winblows box to only send text messages,
> but to reply to messages in the format they were receved in.  I have no need
> for html mail now, and probably never will.  I don't need to do anything
> special with the formatting, since I cant see it anyway.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:47 AM
> Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> 
> 
> > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing elements
> > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > exist as well.
> > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> message
> > in the format it was received in.
> >
> > Regards, Kerry.
> > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > >
> > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > real problem.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > >
> > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gena
> > > > >
> > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or
> kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

Well you got a point.  Noing microshit, the settings will probably go back
to html in a couple of hours.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Nowak" <greg@romualt.dhs.org>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> Ok. But, you know what they say, "never say never" (smile).
> Greg
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:01:03PM -0400, Alex Snow wrote:
> > I have set outlook distress on my winblows box to only send text
messages,
> > but to reply to messages in the format they were receved in.  I have no
need
> > for html mail now, and probably never will.  I don't need to do anything
> > special with the formatting, since I cant see it anyway.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:47 AM
> > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'
> >
> >
> > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions
> > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing
elements
> > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx.
> > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html messages
> > > except to say that there are dangers in html;
> > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers
> > > exist as well.
> > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section,
> > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief.
> > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain text
> > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat.
> > > I encourage people to set their look out distress
> > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply to a
> > message
> > > in the format it was received in.
> > >
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > > > real problem.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a
blockage
> > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still
use
> > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit
Windows
> > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gena
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have your say:
> > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ:
144169465
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath:  kerry@gotss.net kerry@gotss.eu.org or
> > kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ: 8226547 msn: kerry@gotss.net Yahoo: kerryhoath@yahoo.com.au
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Igor Gueths]

Hi Chuck. The main problem in terms of winblows viruses is imbedded
activex scripting code, which automatically executes whenever a winblows
user "highlights" it I hate the word highlight!

Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

>
> I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> real problem.
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
>
> > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > restricted to plain text only?
> > >
> > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > >
> > > Gena
> > >
> > > Have your say:
> > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > >
> > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > >
> > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
> Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Thanks, Igor -

I was not aware of that, although it does not surprise me. I do
not use Windows here - I have no MS products at all on this
machine. My HD has a DOS partition but it is the Caldera OpenDOS
(DR DOS) and not MS.

Chuck


On Wed, 15 May 2002, Igor Gueths wrote:

> Hi Chuck. The main problem in terms of winblows viruses is imbedded
> activex scripting code, which automatically executes whenever a winblows
> user "highlights" it I hate the word highlight!
>
> Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there!
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> >
> > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html messages
> > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most
> > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the
> > real problem.
> >
> > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> >
> > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't been
> > > affected either way with HTML mail.  When I used pine, it was an
> > > annoyance but no more than that.  But I think I would favor a blockage
> > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people still use
> > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it!
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote:
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> > > > restricted to plain text only?
> > > >
> > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is.
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > >
> > > > Have your say:
> > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org
> > > >
> > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see
> > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> > > >
> > > > Personal Contact Details:
> > > > E-mail: gena@gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: 144169465
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 
Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waxing Crescent (12% of Full)

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Toby Fisher]

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Thanks, Igor -
>
> I was not aware of that, although it does not surprise me. I do
> not use Windows here - I have no MS products at all on this
> machine. My HD has a DOS partition but it is the Caldera OpenDOS
> (DR DOS) and not MS.

Yeah, I can honestly say that I haven't used MS DOS since v3.3 that was on
an old college lap top.

hen I got my first 486, I asked for no operating system, and installed
NWDOS as it was at the time.  Then, when my lap top arrived with MSDOS and
Win3.11 pre-installed, I trashed it and put NWDOS7 on that as well.

Cheers.

-- 
Toby Fisher	Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272	Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Alex Snow]

I haven't used dos since 5.0.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toby Fisher" <toby_fisher@bigfoot.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'


> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Igor -
> >
> > I was not aware of that, although it does not surprise me. I do
> > not use Windows here - I have no MS products at all on this
> > machine. My HD has a DOS partition but it is the Caldera OpenDOS
> > (DR DOS) and not MS.
>
> Yeah, I can honestly say that I haven't used MS DOS since v3.3 that was on
> an old college lap top.
>
> hen I got my first 486, I asked for no operating system, and installed
> NWDOS as it was at the time.  Then, when my lap top arrived with MSDOS and
> Win3.11 pre-installed, I trashed it and put NWDOS7 on that as well.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
> Toby Fisher Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
> Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272 Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
> ICQ: #61744808
>    Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
>    See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms'

[Toby Fisher]

On Tue, 14 May 2002, 'Georgina' wrote:

> Hi All
>
> Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit Windows
> viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list messages
> restricted to plain text only?

You won't get any argument here, Gena, that's for sure.

Cheers.

-- 
Toby Fisher	Email: toby@g0ucu.freeserve.co.uk
Tel.: +44(0)1480 417272	Mobile: +44(0)7974 363239
ICQ: #61744808
   Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
   See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html