On Friday 14 October 2005 01:12, Anthony Anson wrote:
The message 200510140035.41757.runlevelten@gmail.com
from Ten runlevelten@gmail.com contains these words:
Sorry, Ten, your mail is almost unreadable.
On reading that back, I see what you mean. Haha.
I don't think you do...
Still, you were warned - rapid, unconnected and tangential thoughts are=20 characteristic of stream of consciousness..
It's not the thoughts, it's the format.
Ahhhh, (*sound of penny dropping*) _now_ I see what you mean, honest. :)
Having been in deep hack for around 4 hours non-stop immediately prior, I=20 fired off that mail in a few seconds.
Don't make excuses for the mail software - it's making a pig's ear of formatting the text, especially ends of lines
On this note, I suspect that this may be your email client not correctly reading the message as quoted-printable.
This may be as a matter of choice of course (many people consider qp icky), but I suspect it's more likely to be related to your client not doing MIME properly, as evidenced by the empty content-type header etc.
Speaking of which..
andnon-standard characters.
Your client not giving proper information on what your message contains, is a reason others reading your mails may see squares and stuff when you use non-standard characters - which is what I see and probably what you see quoted back :)
You may want to fix/report that behaviour, which could be considered broken.
Anyway, I don't want to stick my neck out and say kmail's doing it right and your client's doing it wrong, because I'll want to check that, but your client is doing _some_ stuff wrong which relates to at least one of the problems. :)
However, if it's your client that just refuses to read qp, blaming qp for that is equivalent to blaming JPEG for vanilla versions of links being plain-text.
We accept we won't see the images if we use something that won't show them to us...
Like I said, I will check because Kmail's weirdness with quoted-printableness when you quote it (ie: showing the = and =20 signs in the quote) makes me suspicious.
If you could send me back a copy of my email as it arrived at your end, I'd be grateful, thanks :)
It isn't a critique of linguistics, it's a lament for the absence of plain ASCII
...now this, I can appreciate. I shall try to be mindful of this, though go easy on me if I forget some time. It would still be multipart, mind you, because of the gpg signature :)
I can't help=20 wondering - did you ever test that ram?
No. I think the URL may have disappeared up the SCSI with the earlier incarnation of ZIMACS - but if it didn't, I shall be visiting it, ta.
Go on, you know you want to. :)
You may be right.
If I am, could I have it in writing? My other half won't believe it happened otherwise :D
Later,
Ten