[lug] On standards conformance

[Nate Duehr]

Too much caffeine Tom?

I'm going to reply to this with my iPhone, since it top-posts --  
unless I  feel like taking 5 minutes to do cut and paste formatting...

(GRIN...)

Okay not really TRYING to specifically annoy you, but you're making it  
a little too easy.

I'd add an "attachment" but that'd just be going overboard.

I understand your frustration.

You've done an excellent job "proving" that both the RFC process and e- 
mail in general are utterly and horribly broken, but just saying  
"Don't top post" or stating whatever other broken things (of which  
you've pointed out are many!) are "inappropriate" won't fix it, or  
stop it.

When do we move on to something better-designed? 2010? 2020? How many  
more decades will e-mail survive with 1/4 or more of the traffic  
arriving at port 25 being spam, and whole companies dedicated to  
proxying mail now and "cleaning" it as a multimillion dollar service,  
aimed at limping this unauthenticated "anonymous" busted message  
delivery system along?

Is this the BEST that thousands of open AND closed source "Software  
Engineers" can do? Really? 'Cause this bridge we're all standing on  
seems mighty wobbly! ;-)

On the other hand...

Take it easy man, no emergency here, no one's bleeding on the floor or  
unconscious and not breathing... Perspective.

Comfortably typed from under a blanket on the couch, but darn... Top- 
posted... From my "evil" iPhone.

I guess I will go snip off your reply so it'll look like I care... ;-)

I'd say the fact that Snuggies for Dogs exists as a product is more a  
sign of the end-times being near, than top-posting.

So tell me, where are we really going, and why are we in this  
handbasket?!

--
Nate Duehr
Sent from my iPhone

(I'll leave the reply context header...)

On Nov 30, 2009, at 20:29, Tom Christiansen <tchrist at perl.com> wrote: