> -----Original Message----- > From: Rick Castello > > elitest at best, and discriminatory, at worst. > > Elitist? Discriminatory? > > Them's fightin' words. :) > Your claims are unfounded, and rude. I discussed the merits of > compliant mail tools. Where was I beling elitist? You're right. They are fighting words, and that it was rude. I am sorry I said those words. I believe I got carried away. While your comments may have made me feel that way, I should not have reacted in the manner that I did. My apologies. > There are public free services that aren't borked. Rich > has nothing Locale has a great deal do with it. Some of the public-browsing facilities are sometimes restrictive as to what websites you can access, and if you can't afford a provider at home, but wish to participate, you're stuck using those facilities, for good or ill. Your implication that those people that are having problems with the configuration "should get a better mailer" (I realize that this is not what you _said_, but it is what it sounds like you're saying), is...perhaps unkind to those who are in that situation? I don't feel it is appropiate to assume that all those that have something to contribute have either the technical ability to reconfigure their mailers, have access (by whatever means) to better mailers, etc. I _think_ that the only safe assumption about the participants of a mailing list that a) they're interested in the topic of the list and b) they have access to e-mail in _some_ form.