Comments on: Shocking anti-serifitism!

by: Carolyn

Thu, 01 Dec 2005 09:02:05 +0000

Nothing off fire did marketing, nothing money into made.

by: Jen

Wed, 02 Mar 2005 04:20:42 +0000

Ok, I know this posts is nearly 6 months old, BUT.. my boss sent a memo around the office saying that bill summaries shall no longer be in Arial, but shall be 12 point Times New Roman! I hate them both, but at least TNR is easier to read.

by: Becky

Thu, 09 Sep 2004 20:07:40 +0000

I appreciate the concerns of the plain-text e-mail advocates, but really, what fun is that?Disk space is cheap. Most of us can spare some room for HTML e-mail.Virus-wise, is getting HTML e-mail any more dangerous than just web surfing? I admit, I don’t know the answer. However, I auto-update virus updates and MS fixes as they become available. Nothing is foolproof, but why stop using features just because there’s a possibility of something going wrong?I’ve never had problems with HTML mail getting marked as spam. That I know of. Holy shit, what if Viggo Mortensen sent me an HTML e-mail, and it got marked as spam?Are marketing losers tracking me? Don’t know, don’t care. Everyone’s tracking everything about everybody these days. I’m more worried about the government than I am about marketers who try to find out which e-mails we open.

I want my pretty fonts! That being said, anyone who sends professional correspondence in Comic Sans ought to be fired.

by: Anonymous

Thu, 09 Sep 2004 05:56:08 +0000

Yes.

by: Anonymous

Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:23:27 +0000

I myself am a heavy advocate for plain-text emails for the following reasons:

* They are not HTML-based, thus less likely to get marked as spam.
* They are not HTML-based, thus less likely to infect computers with viri.
* They are not HTML-based, thus less likely to allow some marketing looser track you with inline images.
* They are not HTML-based, thus take way less space on you HD to store, and download much faster.
* Plus, they allow the reader of the email to read the it in any font they so choose.

I mean okay, with HTML you can be _slightly_ more stylistic (and thus informative) but is it worth all the above headaches?

by: Jen

Wed, 08 Sep 2004 23:38:24 +0000

I’m a serif type girl and all my outlines, cover letters and resumes are in Sylfaen. (Of course, maybe that’s why I don’t have a job lined up for post-graduation yet.) And now that you’ve asked, I’ll be sending a letter to the candidates asking their opinions on this matter. Perhaps I’ll be swayed by the results!

by: Anonymous

Wed, 08 Sep 2004 01:30:46 +0000

I dunno. I do all technical documentation in Times New Roman, even though it’s a bit conservative. My e-mail font is Palatino because I like the capital ‘Y.’ For a long time, boss-across-the-hall couldn’t understand why I kept sending him e-mail that ended with YYYYYY.

I’m with Suzette on the serifs–I learned in tech writing courses that the serifs “lead” the eye from one character to the next, making a body of text easier to read.

Jen, are you a serif or sans-serif woman? If you like serifs, what’s your preferred alternative to Times NR? Also, I belive you are politically minded. Will you be investigating the presidential candidates’ positions on this issue?

by: Jen

Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:39:44 +0000

From the looks of the comments, I think we all agree that Times New Roman sucks.

by: Suzette

Tue, 07 Sep 2004 21:23:08 +0000

In my time, I’ve produced some educational publications for healthcare consumers and the primary rule for appearance is that a serif anchors the eye and makes the text more easily read. My previous VP insisted on correspondence in Arial. I begrudgingly complied, but took comfort in the fact that he was putting himself at a disadvantage. What a maroon.

by: Becky

Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:29:59 +0000

Unless you’re a citizen of Birmingham, I don’t think there’s a penalty. However, don’t be surprised if he doesn’t answer your letter.