Re: [HACKERS] Avoiding legal email signatures

Andrew Hammond wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 6/12/07, Tom Lane wrote:
>> A more serious objection is that any automated tool would probably get it
>> wrong sometimes, and strip important text.
>>
>> > I vote 'lets not bother'
>>
>> Right. I agree with Josh's idea about mentioning list policies in the
>> subscription confirmation message, though.
>
> Why? If the legal mumbo-jumbo has already got some precedence as being
> un-enforcable (even if it's only in a handful of jurisdictions), why
> give it even a patina of credibility by addressing it in a policy?

We are addressing the "whole" using postgresql.org mailing lists issue.
The legality issue is only part of it.

It is always a good idea to document against stuff like this, just in case.

Joshua D. Drake

> Saying that it's not applicable here implies that is is applicable
> elsewhere. To quote Ghandi "first they laugh at you, then they ignore
> you, then they fight you, then you win." I say we stick with the
> laughing. To that end, I propose should have a policy about being
> pelted with scathing sarcasm when the signal to boilerplate ratio
> drops below 10:1.
>
> Andrew
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFGbxln+zlEYLc6JJgRAuaNAJsECSRrgIqR1f5c15P7OszVa34lVgCghWSb
> io55WHyChKGQVHCQ9R+z2ec=
> =KNyQ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/