Is this better? - was Hugh's long .sig
ckloiber at ckloiber.com
Tue Apr 27 17:22:27 UTC 2004
On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 19:06, Douglas Furlong wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 11:08, Hugh Foster wrote:
> > In order to fit this list better, I have moved my subscription from my
> > servisair.com address to this, my home account, the software for which
> > can format mail dependent on where it's going. It will cost me, as I
> > have to dialup for this rather than use the LAN, but if it keeps the
> > peace, it's worth it.
> > My apologies for the disruption.
> I think your sig here is okay, but do you really want to sign off with an apology for disruption? ;)
> I think the main problem is not so much you, just the general attitude
> towards Sig's. It's fair (I think) to get upset when reading a list and
> having HUGE sigs put on every thing.
> Companies should really try to shorten them, and also have it so that if
> posting to a world readable list, then at worst have a sig that just
> says this person does not represent the company in their opinion. As
> apposed to every thing else.
> I am currently resisting implementing signatures at my company until
> they come up with one that is not 500 lines long.
Let them come up with all the legaleese they want- on a web page linked
from a 1-2 line company sig, leaving the other 2-3 lines for the
employee. That way everybody is happy.
More information about the users