I get the frustration. But I think that war's been lost.
Within a given organisation (if you're exceptionally lucky), or on some mailing lists, you might be able to enforce discipline. At large, though, this mostly doesn't scale.
I think it's unfortunate -- there's a very strong degree to which standards of message formatting are useful and helpful. And, in counterpoint to much of the disagreement to your point, it's not as if a bunch of Unix geeks in the 1970s and 1980s started the concept -- go through any "how to succeed in business without really trying" manual from the 1920s through 1970s, and you'll find strongly specified guides on how you are to type and format your business correspondence (using your monospace Royal, or later, IBM Selectric, typewriter). And deviations from those standards were not appreciated.
But until and unless some Hand of God comes down and enforces discipline again, we're in our current State of Babel.
On the other hand, client quirks are so common now that configuring you email stream to:
1. Render all incoming messages as flat, 72-character, ASCII
2. Outputing messages with same, '> ' quoting, etc., etc., is pretty much perfectly justifiable.
"Oh, my email doesn't handle attachments or binaries, I'm sorry."
If you are in a position to ensure people talk to you on your terms, so much the better. I can approach that, but there are sacrifices to be made.