OT: The sig flame war starts here (was Re: [Gllug] Microsoft 'tnef' files)

[David Damerell]

On Wednesday, 10 Jul 2002, Simon Stewart wrote:
>So that's a compelling argument for having more sig than message?
>There are a lot of people who view short sigs as a part of basic
>netiquette, and many of these people are on technical mailing
>lists. Why not follow this netiquette when posting to one of these?

Quite. Like it or not - even if you regard it as a totally arbitary
convention (which I don't, because longer .signatures increase the
chance of a spurious need to page at the end of an article or message
- and even in the Elder Days it wasn't just about bandwidth, else the
limit would be characters, not lines), a 13-line .signature might as
well be replaced with one that just says;

dash-dash-space
<bozo at idiot.org> I am a luser!

... which would have the added advantage of being under the McQuary
Limit. :-)

-- 
David Damerell <damerell at chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug