[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: DISC: To sig or Not To sig.
> But you see it IS common courtesy when using list servers that
> are not mature enough software to have header control. Often sig
> addresses are required (at least on professional lists).
I've been using professional lists since I've been on the Internet,
and this is the second time I've seen the claim that .sigs are
required by courtesy. And that's over 10 years. The software at fault,
by the way, is not the listserve software, it's your local mail
reader. Only a tiny fraction of mailing lists automatically put
addresses at the end of messages; of the professional lists I've used,
few readers have their addresses in their .signature files, if they
have one at all. Signature files have been going out of style for
quite a while.
> *I* consider mail without signature impolite and depending on
> the content of the message possibly cowardly or even cruel.
> Does it cost so much?
It's not a matter of cost -- it's a matter of calling people names for
not agreeing with you. I'm happy to be sympathetic with your broken
mail reader, but asking millions of people to change how they deal
with tens of thousands of mailing lists is a large cost.
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: email@example.com