4 ms·
Your argument is valid for standard correspondence. It is not valid for commercial marketing. A well-designed HTML email will look stunning in the vast majority
by systemtrigger 15y ago
Your argument is valid for standard correspondence. It is not valid for commercial marketing. A well-designed HTML email will look stunning in the vast majority of email clients. If marketing ROI is the goal, it is best to ignore the edge cases you mention.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- ItsTrueYouKnow 15y agoIf you're sending spam and marketing ROI is the goal, then you're part of the problem. Email was once useful for communicating with people but as the tide shifts from correspondence to commercialism it has completely lost its point. Nowadays an email address is little more than a way for people who got it to shove advertising down your throat.
- mseebach 15y agoI very frequently write and receive standard correspondence that benefit massively from employing appropriate use of bold, italics and bullet points. I'm against over-using formatting, but just because some websites are ugly it doesn't mean that the web in general doesn't benefit from being marked up for presentation. This plain-text only crusade is a sad remnant from a time when the individual bandwidth consumed by each message actually mattered and/or there was a real risk that some people for valid reasons had an e-mail client incapable of displaying HTML emails. Neither is valid any more, and what's more, there's a rich selection of quality e-mail clients available that will happily only show you the plain text version of the e-mail you're looking at: Be liberal in what you accept and conservative in what you send.