(Slightly OT) Forwarding email: inline vs as attachment

[Darrin Chandler]

On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 10:23:51AM -0700, Rich wrote:
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-earlier message:
> I seem to remember reading something some time ago that led me to
> believe that forwarding "as attachment" was preferable (somehow better)
> than forwarding "inline". I may be mistaken.
> 
> In the Thunderbird tutorial, I see this:
> Unless you have specific reasons not to include an email forward inline,
> you should let emails be forwarded inline, by consideration for the
> recipient: scrolling down is a lot easier than double clicking an email
> attachment.
> 
> Can anyone explain why one would want to forward as attachment?
> 
> TIA
> --
> -Eric 'shubes'
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 
> It seems to me that inline would be more trusted, as attachments sometimes
> bear unwelcome gifts. This would be especially true if the message were not
> HTML. I vote for inline...
> -- 
> ...Rich

When I want to forward the *contents* of a message I forward inline.
When I want to forward the *message* I forward attached. Don't know
about different MUA behavior, but usually you don't get headers, etc.,
with inline.

If you're forwarding an email to someone helping you figure out
something weird with email they probably want an attached message rather
than inline.

-- 
Darrin Chandler            |  Phoenix BSD Users Group
dwchandler at stilyagin.com   |  http://bsd.phoenix.az.us/
http://www.stilyagin.com/  |