1996-11-29 - under 80 chars to a line PLEASE!

Header Data

From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
To: whgiii@amaranth.com
Message Hash: 435578818d36c582eb2014eb9c33a3a989670c9e66331dc2c9a75aec77bda727
Message ID: <199611270629.GAA00259@server.test.net>
Reply To: <199611282045.OAA12565@mailhub.amaranth.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-11-29 13:33:30 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 05:33:30 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 05:33:30 -0800 (PST)
To: whgiii@amaranth.com
Subject: under 80 chars to a line PLEASE!
In-Reply-To: <199611282045.OAA12565@mailhub.amaranth.com>
Message-ID: <199611270629.GAA00259@server.test.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

William Geiger <whgiii@amaranth.com> writes:
> Dimitri Vulis <dlv@bwalk.dm.com> writes:
> >Surely someone who can't learn to format their text to 80 columns
> >(perhaps because he uses a dead operating system) has no credibility when
> >he speaks of technical things he clearly knows nothing about.
> Are you incapable of turning on the word-wrap on your editor??

You may not get along with Dimitri, but in this case you are clearly
in the wrong.  If you consult any newbie FAQs for USENET, mailing
lists, netiquette, etc. you should notice that lines less than 80
chars long are recommended.

People who insist on splurging 120 char. long lines are usually poorly
read.  It just looks so disgusting as to be near unreadable on the
majority of newsreading software.  With the volume of this list, and
the fact that the cluefull actually do produce < 80 long lines, I'm
sure many just don't have the patience to read such stuff.

Retorts about how the reader should ajust their software to your
non-compliance to the accepted standards is just ridiculous.

I've also got a beef with people who produce mime encoded junk.
Things where all lines end in `=', and punctuation characters are mime
encoded.  Yuck!  Turn it off!

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>