In article <PQCU4oQ0mA/F092yn@scn.org>, bg809@scn.org (Jeff Foy) wrote:
> In article <199912092004.MAA24762@ shell1.ncal.verio.com>,
> Howard Schwartz <theo@ncal.verio.com> wrote:
> >
> >It is probably not wise to automatically delete ALL MIME-encoded messages
> >since some mailers introduce plain text as MIME-encoded, and you might
> >want a friend on occasion to send you a picture, or a binary program
> >in the mail.
>
> The people who e-mail me know that I don't accept binaries in
> e-mail ever. I just delete them outright and don't respond to the
> message(s).
That's a bit drastic, isn't it?? Yes, exe's are rejected automatically
by using filter rules in my mail server, but any other attachment is
accepted as I have mcafee for os/2, which, in my opinion, is a good
program.
>
> >similar program automatically skip the DISPLAY on the screen of a
> >particular type of MIME message:
>
> Actually, the MIME messages don't bother me all that much. It's
> really those HTML-ified messages that drive me nutty.
I don't mind them all that much, I just read the textpart alternative
that comes (usually) before the html part. Unfortunately though,
nutscrape doesn't include a text alternative, that's when it really does
get anoying.
>
> >If you want html or other parts of messages actually deleted from your
>
> I don't want the html parts of messages deleted. I want the
> WHOLE message deleted if it has *any* HTML tags in it. There isn't any
> reason for that HTML stuff in messages and I'd prefer not to have to
> bother with them at all.
For email, use the filter program and ask it to delete the mail if in
the header there is a reference to content-type: text/html?? Also, this
can be done using score rules in yarn/souper/vsoup/etc, that will take
the score down below 0 of any messages thereof.
>
> I suspect I'm going to have to roll my own solution until (or
> unless) Chin decides to release the source to Yarn. But thanks for your
> replies. I appreciate them.
Don't know how this will help you much, as I doubt many people would
actually use the feature much, and besides, its already (in a way)
avalable.
- --
Sincerely,
Andrew.
A million thoughts go racing through my mind, I find I haven't said a word.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.1i
iQA/AwUBOFk053scXA/AEgvfEQK5UgCgr0I8OJFfsTSXp4Y7I64BkCfDhY4AniUw
BqGdN2gxCd+sjUsT/QTFm9FV
=Lrfp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----