[dozzie]

> Do we really need to send plain versions or it's just a second system syndrome of doing everything "right"?

Yes, you do need to send plain versions. I make my e-mail clients to use plain text version first, and if that's not available, HTML version dumbed down to plain text. The cases when somebody needs to send formatted e-mail are really, really rare. Though...

> From day to day, we send lots of emails and a huge fraction of those are of marketing nature.

...I delete marketing e-mails on the spot.

[notrheadagain]

Personally, I agree emails should be sent in two versions. However, there's a trend of sending just HTML. This article was written some time ago https://litmus.com/blog/best-practices-for-plain-text-emails... and latest comments will also promote the idea of dumping plain text.

Regarding marketing emails, I mean every automated email sequence. Like, you definitely get receipts and stuff over email. And those aren't written by hand.

[dozzie]

Receipt or order confirmation is not (or at least should not be) a marketing e-mail. It's a technicality necessary for transaction.

[notrheadagain]

However, the rule of thumb, especially for drip campaigns, is that you do get some marketing content with almost every email. This could be a specific sign off and such.

[curtisblaine]

> Yes, you do need to send plain versions. I make my e-mail clients to use plain text version first, and if that's not available, HTML version dumbed down to plain text.

So if OP sends an HTML mail, you will be able to read it anyway, proving that they don't need to send plain text at all :)

[dozzie]

Sure, if he doesn't care that his fancy tables and CSS formatting will look like sh&t on my terminal, defeating the very first thing that marketing material must do: look good.

[notrheadagain]

The plain text versions I was talking about are those well-formatted and structured ones. Where you get the minimalistic beauty of simple formatting. Markdown-style, maybe.