Does stationary hinder email

[LAMB]

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which I’ve
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[Bob I]

Yes, and it's good idea.

 

[JoAnn Paules]

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way I want my business
emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is to occasionally
make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if I *really* want to
get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the best way to convince
my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

 

[Tom [Pepper] Willett]

Your IT guy is correct. Plus, since they make the policy, that's what you
go by.

:I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
: stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his
email
: for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:
:
: Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
: e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.
:
: "Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
: Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which I've
: fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck for
: remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
: sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"
:
: HELP!!!!

 

[LAMB]

I don't add pictures, I just change the background from white to a color.
That is what I meant, sorry for the confusion. Also, he is kind of a control
freak so nobody here believes what he was saying.

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way I want my business
emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is to occasionally
make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if I *really* want to
get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the best way to convince
my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his
email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which I’ve
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[JoAnn Paules]

But he's the IT control freak so there really isn't too much you can do
about it. That battle is not worth fighting, ya know?

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I don't add pictures, I just change the background from white to a color.
That is what I meant, sorry for the confusion. Also, he is kind of a
control
freak so nobody here believes what he was saying.

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way I want my
business
emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is to occasionally
make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if I *really* want
to
get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the best way to
convince
my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his
email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which
I’ve
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck
for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[LVTravel]

Why don't you see for yourself. Send an email to yourself
with the colored background you normally use and then send
the same one with no background color. Outlook Express or
Outlook will show the relative size of both of the emails in
the size column when you receive them back. If the color
email is larger, it will be slower to not only receive but
send

Let us know what you get back when you try the test..

I don't add pictures, I just change the background from
white to a color.
That is what I meant, sorry for the confusion. Also, he
is kind of a control
freak so nobody here believes what he was saying.

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see
the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way
I want my business
emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is
to occasionally
make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if
I *really* want to
get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the
best way to convince
my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What
would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can
no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I
have attached his
email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or
not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary
and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for
certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail
clients for which I've
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it
creates a bottleneck for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections
and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[John Hanley]

It sounds as if the OP's IT group wants to have all the emails formatted as
plain text? That would be a shame to ditch the Rich Text features....

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way I want my
business emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is to
occasionally make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if I
*really* want to get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the
best way to convince my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his
email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which I’ve
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[JoAnn Paules]

I could do without them. They're just bells and whistles.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

It sounds as if the OP's IT group wants to have all the emails formatted
as plain text? That would be a shame to ditch the Rich Text features....

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the graphics. I
don't use them at work because they really aren't the way I want my
business emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I get is to
occasionally make a word bold to emphasize something. Red and bold if I
*really* want to get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc just aren't the
best way to convince my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do? IT
makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached his
email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for which
I've
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck
for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[Bob I]

No the OP's IT stated that "custom stationary and backgrounds" (found
only in HTML) will not be allowed. RTF doesn't support/have those features.

It sounds as if the OP's IT group wants to have all the emails formatted
as plain text? That would be a shame to ditch the Rich Text features....

It can add to the size and some remote users will not see the
graphics. I don't use them at work because they really aren't the way
I want my business emails to look. I keep it simple. The "wildest" I
get is to occasionally make a word bold to emphasize something. Red
and bold if I *really* want to get the word out. Kitties, flowers, etc
just aren't the best way to convince my managers that I'm professional.

But let's assume the atatement is completely false. What would you do?
IT makes the rules that apply to your computer.

--

JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375

I received an email from my IT guy that states we can no-longer use
stationary or backgrounds in our outgoing emails. I have attached
his email
for you all to read. Please tell me if this is true or not:

Effective Monday February 4, 2008, custom stationary and backgrounds
within
e-mail messages will no longer be permitted.

"Unfortunately, it creates an unnecessary hindrance for certain e-mail
Clients (other then Outlook) and all web based e-mail clients for
which I’ve
fielded complaints as of late. Additionally, it creates a bottleneck
for
remote users checking e-mail over slower connections and doubles and
sometimes triples the size of an average e-mail"

HELP!!!!

 

[XS11E]

It sounds as if the OP's IT group wants to have all the emails
formatted as plain text? That would be a shame to ditch the Rich
Text features....

WOW, do we disagree! Email should be entirely plain text.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

No, email should be what the user/recipients REQUIRE. Your opinion and mine make no difference to the people who have different requirements, such as sending contacts, etc. which require Rich Text in Outlook. Likewise, using a company stationery (a major business requirement) must have HTML as the format, either in Word or the Outlook editor.

So, suffice it to say, what you believe should be the only format for mail differs greatly from what the general email using community requires.

IOW, different strokes for different folks.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

|
|| It sounds as if the OP's IT group wants to have all the emails
|| formatted as plain text? That would be a shame to ditch the Rich
|| Text features....
|
| WOW, do we disagree! Email should be entirely plain text.

 

[OG]

My 2 cents:
In my neighborhood, DSL and Cable does not exist. HTML and Rich Text
e-mail messages are considerably larger than Plain Text e-mail. Since I am
limited to dial-up, I send *and receive* e-mail in plain text.
I can not read electronic text placed upon tinted backgrounds. I
sometimes receive such e-mails at work; I simply delete them, no matter how
*important* they are deemed to be to the business. I tell management that if
an e-mail is important enough for me to read, then it will be sent in a
format that I can, in fact, read.
Steve

 

[XS11E]

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"

No, email should be what the user/recipients REQUIRE.

STRONGLY DISAGREE!

Your opinion and mine make no difference to the people who have
different requirements, such as sending contacts, etc. which
require Rich Text in Outlook.

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of etiquette, the rules
have been established over a very long period of time.

Sending contacts, pictures, etc are why there are attachments.

Likewise, using a company stationery (a major business requirement)

Not a requirement except in someone's over active imagination.

IOW, different strokes for different folks.

Wrong. Again, that's why there are established rules of etiquette.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Sigh - where to begin. Inline works for me.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|
|| No, email should be what the user/recipients REQUIRE.
|
| STRONGLY DISAGREE!
|
|| Your opinion and mine make no difference to the people who have
|| different requirements, such as sending contacts, etc. which
|| require Rich Text in Outlook.
|
| It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of etiquette, the rules
| have been established over a very long period of time.

Show me!

|
| Sending contacts, pictures, etc are why there are attachments.
|

Wrong, contacts, appointments, etc. require RTF for sending unless you want garbage characters and no form.

|| Likewise, using a company stationery (a major business requirement)
|
| Not a requirement except in someone's over active imagination.

Tell it to the CEO who insists on branding and logos.

|
|| IOW, different strokes for different folks.
|
| Wrong. Again, that's why there are established rules of etiquette.

Again, show me. Every RFC I have ever read has been prefaced with a recommendation, never a requirement.

The ball is in your court.

 

[XS11E]

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"

Sigh - where to begin. Inline works for me.

--

And since you top posted the above, my newsreader tried to delete all
below the sigdash as a good newsreader should. One more reason top
posting is wrong.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|
|| No, email should be what the user/recipients REQUIRE.
|
| STRONGLY DISAGREE!
|
|| Your opinion and mine make no difference to the people who have
|| different requirements, such as sending contacts, etc. which
|| require Rich Text in Outlook.
|
| It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of etiquette, the
| rules have been established over a very long period of time.

Show me!

Google will do that, start here:

http://www.iwillfollow.com/email.htm

Scroll down to the formatting section.

|
| Sending contacts, pictures, etc are why there are attachments.
|

Wrong, contacts, appointments, etc. require RTF for sending unless
you want garbage characters and no form.

Wrong, attachments work just fine.

|| Likewise, using a company stationery (a major business
|| requirement)
|
| Not a requirement except in someone's over active imagination.

Tell it to the CEO who insists on branding and logos.

The world is full of people who don't know better, they should be shown
the right way to do things.

|| IOW, different strokes for different folks.
|
| Wrong. Again, that's why there are established rules of
| etiquette.

Again, show me. Every RFC I have ever read has been prefaced with
a recommendation, never a requirement.

The ball is in your court.

Again, Google will show you.

For those of use who began with ARPNET, rules of etiquette are long
established because they work. You might refer to other posts in this
discussion for additional reasons to follow the rules of etiquette,
they don't expire, they don't grow outdated. You still shouldn't chew
with your mouth open, interrupt others conversations, top post or use
HTML in email or newsgroups.

Because MSFT has chosen to completely ignore GNSKA in it's newsreaders
or Outlook encourages this discourtesy to others is no reason we have
compound the discourtesy.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Oh, grow the heck up. Get used to the fact that your little closed world of 10+ years ago is gone.

And here is an except from your precious ARPANET RFCs: This RFC suggests a *proposed* protocol - Note it does not say *required* protocol.

Read the rest here, or do you also reject RFCs?:
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc951.txt

Get a clue - the world has moved on and you have been left behind.

Oh, and automatic transmission works a treat! And so do microwaves. And I dare you to try HD TV, or maybe getting a color set would be a more gentle introduction to the modern world.

As for top posting, only those with short term memory loss bottom post - the rest of us remember what was posted and don't need to needlessly keep scrolling through the detritis of old conversations to remind us why we are reading the post in the first place.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|
|| Sigh - where to begin. Inline works for me.
||
|| --
|
| And since you top posted the above, my newsreader tried to delete all
| below the sigdash as a good newsreader should. One more reason top
| posting is wrong.
|| After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:
||
||| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|||
|||| No, email should be what the user/recipients REQUIRE.
|||
||| STRONGLY DISAGREE!
|||
|||| Your opinion and mine make no difference to the people who have
|||| different requirements, such as sending contacts, etc. which
|||| require Rich Text in Outlook.
|||
||| It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of etiquette, the
||| rules have been established over a very long period of time.
||
|| Show me!
|
| Google will do that, start here:
|
| http://www.iwillfollow.com/email.htm
|
| Scroll down to the formatting section.
|
|
||
|||
||| Sending contacts, pictures, etc are why there are attachments.
|||
||
|| Wrong, contacts, appointments, etc. require RTF for sending unless
|| you want garbage characters and no form.
|
| Wrong, attachments work just fine.
|
|||| Likewise, using a company stationery (a major business
|||| requirement)
|||
||| Not a requirement except in someone's over active imagination.
||
|| Tell it to the CEO who insists on branding and logos.
|
| The world is full of people who don't know better, they should be
| shown the right way to do things.
|
|||| IOW, different strokes for different folks.
|||
||| Wrong. Again, that's why there are established rules of
||| etiquette.
||
|| Again, show me. Every RFC I have ever read has been prefaced with
|| a recommendation, never a requirement.
||
|| The ball is in your court.
|
| Again, Google will show you.
|
| For those of use who began with ARPNET, rules of etiquette are long
| established because they work. You might refer to other posts in this
| discussion for additional reasons to follow the rules of etiquette,
| they don't expire, they don't grow outdated. You still shouldn't chew
| with your mouth open, interrupt others conversations, top post or use
| HTML in email or newsgroups.
|
| Because MSFT has chosen to completely ignore GNSKA in it's newsreaders
| or Outlook encourages this discourtesy to others is no reason we have
| compound the discourtesy.

 

[XS11E]

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"

Oh, grow the heck up. Get used to the fact that your little
closed world of 10+ years ago is gone.

Good manners never go out of style.

You've been told by me and others here why your top posting and defense
of HTML email is very rude but you chose to ignore that.

Courtesy to others is important to some of us, apparently not to you?

One more note on etiquette:
"it's not good to break the standards --
they're there to make things work a well as possible"
and that's exactly what they do.

I've snipped the rest of your post so you won't look like even more of
a rude and clueless newbie than you already have.

Your posts are very helpful to many here, it would be nice if you'd
learn to post properly but, again, you obviously don't really care.

Bye.

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Please read http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855 and note this preamble:

"This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind."


--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|
|| Oh, grow the heck up. Get used to the fact that your little
|| closed world of 10+ years ago is gone.
|
| Good manners never go out of style.
|
| You've been told by me and others here why your top posting and
| defense of HTML email is very rude but you chose to ignore that.
|
| Courtesy to others is important to some of us, apparently not to you?
|
| One more note on etiquette:
| "it's not good to break the standards --
| they're there to make things work a well as possible"
| and that's exactly what they do.
|
| I've snipped the rest of your post so you won't look like even more of
| a rude and clueless newbie than you already have.
|
| Your posts are very helpful to many here, it would be nice if you'd
| learn to post properly but, again, you obviously don't really care.
|
| Bye.

 

[JoAnn Paules]

Thanks for that link. I need to post something in another group about
lengthy sig files and that link will come in useful.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375


Please read http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855 and note this preamble:

"This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind."


--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, XS11E asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|
|| Oh, grow the heck up. Get used to the fact that your little
|| closed world of 10+ years ago is gone.
|
| Good manners never go out of style.
|
| You've been told by me and others here why your top posting and
| defense of HTML email is very rude but you chose to ignore that.
|
| Courtesy to others is important to some of us, apparently not to you?
|
| One more note on etiquette:
| "it's not good to break the standards --
| they're there to make things work a well as possible"
| and that's exactly what they do.
|
| I've snipped the rest of your post so you won't look like even more of
| a rude and clueless newbie than you already have.
|
| Your posts are very helpful to many here, it would be nice if you'd
| learn to post properly but, again, you obviously don't really care.
|
| Bye.