Recent email messages & test

[wb4jfi at knology.net]

Chip:
OK, let's try a different approach.

I am sending this to you both directly and via tacos.  Please wait until you 
get both versions, and then let us know how they came out.  Since you 
responded so quickly to my email last night, I assume that you read the 
direct version of it, and not via the tacos digest.  The fact that you had 
no problem with the direct version implies to me that something else is 
afoot.  Especially since the offensive HTML was still attached below it.

This message is thought by me to be a clean message, no HTML, no previous 
posts tagged on.  It is being created on my regular email computer using my 
regular email client, that I have used for over a year with no major changes 
to settings (other than accounts being added).  I have had zero other 
complaints about HTML encoding regarding previous posts, including from you.

If others on tacos are having HTML problems as well, please let us know. 
Right now, I interpret the lack of complaints meaning this is an isolated 
problem.  But if others are having similar issues, we need to find the root 
cause.  If that root cause is pasting good information from web sites, I'm 
sorry, but my answer is to live with it on those rare occasions that it 
happens.  At least we will know, ad the offensive messages can be ignored at 
the readers discretion.

I will also send another message via my iPad a little later today (to use a 
completely different email client), after I really wake up.  Tonight I may 
also try sending another test email with some information cut-and-pasted 
from a web site to purposely "trigger" an HTML event.  It will be 
interesting to see how your email client treats a message with HTML in it 
directly from me versus via tacos digest.

(MAITLAND:  Could something have recently changed in the email reflector 
that has altered how HTML-encoded emails are handled?  Could that account 
for Chip's recent problems?)

Chip, I want to make sure that you realize a couple things that I was trying 
to say, and may have gotten lost in the vitriol:

One:  Neither Paul nor I were aware that our messages had HTML in them.  We 
did not purposely add HTML to offend you personally.
Two:  Our messages looked absolutely fine to us, coming back via tacos.  We 
had no idea of any problems until your comments much later.
Three: Digest mode may be contributing to the problem.
Four: I DID read you previous posts.  My reaction was to the flavor and 
coloring that I interpreted within and behind the wording therein.  Your 
message last week regarding Paul's email included an implication to me that 
he sent it knowing it was HTML-encoded, the dummy.  My interpretation of 
your emails last night regarding my post was: Aha!  More crap!  Proving my 
point!  (< your words) You're an idiot for putting it in HTML!
Five:  You are the only one that I am aware of complaining about this issue.
Six:  Don't blame the sender without thorough troubleshooting of the 
problem.

Positive feedback (insert image of unicorns frolicking through fields of 
daisies - or your favorite flower - here):
Calling well-meaning contributions crap and people idiots does not increase 
the positivity quotient.  My interpretation of your original comments to 
both Paul's message last week, and to mine last night, led me to my 
"negative" assumption.  If they were simply you providing positive, 
constructive criticism, I apologize.  My negativity filter must need 
recalibration.

Let's have a virtual beer, shake hands, walk ten paces, turn, and fire. 
Kidding.
Terry