[plug] Poll regarding attachments

[Leon Brooks]

On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 17:12, Arie Hol wrote:
> but your blatant attitudes do not give me
> a great deal of comfort.

] 1. Unpleasantly loud and noisy: "There are those who find the trombones
]    blatant and the triangle silly, but both add effective color" (Musical
]    Heritage Review). See Synonyms at vociferous.

] 2. Totally or offensively conspicuous or obtrusive: a blatant lie.

Um, I take offense at either definition. 
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=blatant

Presuming that you're misusing `blatant' and are simply objecting to the lack 
of qualifiers, my attitude will not alter a key fact: knackering this list 
down to text-only no-attachments 10k-or-less will not prevent Windows users 
from getting email viruses. In fact, it may even be ineffective for 
preventing virii arriving _through_the_knackered_list_, who knows what 
pattern-matching Outlook does on plain text?

If nobbling the list that much won't be of significant assistance to anyone, I 
question the value of handicapping the list at all.

As far as attitude goes, my attitude is that multi-choice sucks when compared 
to freedom. It's not as if we _need_ our choices restricted any further, is 
it?

Cheers; Leon