®óñ© © ²°¹°-°¹ said:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:48:06 +0000, Znep
>>In uk.rec.sheds,  (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>>>Dave Budd said:
>>>>> In uk.rec.sheds,  (Richard Robinson) wrote in
>>>>> >Znep said:
>>>>> >> In uk.rec.sheds,  (Dave Budd) wrote in
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>Well yes, but also you can use owt that html allows, rather than being 
>>>>> >>>restricted to ASCII
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Yes, that's another downside.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >Why ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm a fan of content over presentation, TBH.  NNTP is sparse, efficient
>>>>> and brisk.  If you can't get your point across without blink tags or
>>>>> whatever, perhaps it's not worth saying?
>>>>
>>>> That's down to authors rather than the medium though. 
>>>> You can't really say Usenet is better for content if you include all 
>>>> the trolls and other idiots
>>>
>>>I'm receiving a 3-figure number of spams for every single nonspam. Email is
>>>much greater than 99% noise.
>>
>>You need better filters, mate.  I'm getting an SNR of about 1.8
>
> I've got no, count 'em, active filters.   I receive virtually zilch x
> spams.      (This is not an invitation to try me)

Is that the adress given in your header ? If so, I think it goes to other
machines before you see it ? I'd guess they do some filtering. BICBWACRBA.

-- 
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html