From b2a51ac40e7046e15d9adfaf1bfbbb575d32f0d8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mikaela Suomalainen <mikaela.suomalainen@outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 17:38:09 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] Clearsigning.md: Run throught markdown.

---
 Clearsigning.html | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Clearsigning.html b/Clearsigning.html
index 7b46249..48996fd 100644
--- a/Clearsigning.html
+++ b/Clearsigning.html
@@ -1,7 +1,17 @@
-Why do you GPG clearsign your emails instead of using PGP/MIME or something less spammy?
-    I am clearsigning my emails instead of using PGP/MIME, because I am on 
+<h2>Why do you GPG clearsign your emails instead of using PGP/MIME or something less spammy?</h2>
+
+<p>I am clearsigning my emails instead of using PGP/MIME, because I am on 
 multiple mailing lists and most of them use mailing list software, 
 which messes up with headers and this way make PGP/MIME signatures 
-unverifiable.
-    I know that clearsigned messages may look ugly to email clients, which
-don't support PGP, but they can at least be verified on all mailing lists.
+unverifiable.</p>
+
+<h2>But clearsigned signature looks ugly.</h2>
+
+<p>I know that clearsigned messages may look ugly to email clients, which
+don't support PGP, but they can at least be verified on all mailing lists.</p>
+
+<h2>I am on slow connection and your signature is too big for me.</h2>
+
+<p>I am sorry for that. But keep in mind that your email client would still
+download ther PGP/MIME signature (signature.asc) file even if I used
+PGP/MIME.</p>