2009/4/22 tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx>: > At 6:31 PM +0200 4/22/09, Jan G.B. wrote: >> >> I believe that you all should just overread the huge signature. >> You've wasted a lot bandwidth with this discussion about the signature. >> :-) >> It's not interesting. >> You could have send your pointless replies to the person, skipping the >> mailing list, so that we aren't annoyed by your drivel which is send >> to thousnads of mail servers. >> >> 2009/4/22 tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>> Second, if they insist on continuing this idiotic practice, then get a >>> different email account for yourself. There are many places where you >>> can >>> get an email account (i.e., gmail, yahoo, etc.) and it's pretty simple >>> to >>> set one up so that you can use it from work. >>> >> >> Some companies will fire you for using private email at work. => VERY GOOD >> TIP. >> >>> Just because your company has idiotic practices doesn't mean that you >>> have >>> to follow suit. >>> >> >> It's idiotic to speak about that crap! >> >> >> thanks for your time. time to get back on topic. > > Jan: > > Thanks for your input and you may be right, but you must also realize that > this list governs itself, right? > > If I get tried of reading the same pointless excessive signature over and > over again and want to comment about it, I will. > Sure, do it. My point was that it seems ineffective to me to argue on such topics at all. But surely you can do whatever you want. Just like ... I or other readers can fill their killfile if such threads come more often. > Your opinion as to IF I should say something, or not, carries little weight. > When you've donated enough time helping others on this list, then perhaps > that will change. Sorry, but that's a bad attitude in my opinion. It's like "No matter how right or wrong you are, I will not listen to you unless you've kissed Johns feet 10 times, like I did." > But for the moment, I think it's best for the OP to check > with his work and see if he can reason with them. If not, I certainly have > no reason to read the same "drivel" again and again. As such, I can skip > questions posted by him -- and who does that hurt? > I for myself would fell in laughter if a collegue comes to my desk, asking to remove network filters or the mandatory signature of our company. But on to your question: I guess it wouldn't hurt at all if you'd skip the reply regarding his signature. :-) > Now if you have a problem with the way we "moderate" this list, then post > your objections and we'll all consider them and adapt what works. So I have reached the limit of "When you've donated enough time", yet? Great. > But as I > see it, refusing to trim excessive signatures is not one that works well on > this list. Remember, we all donate our time AND we choose who we help. > It's clear that you can chose whom to help. But what you actually do here is argueing on some off topic bytes. Surely, after everyone is giving opionions about that, it's gonna be the topic. But not a topic with any conclusions. > Cheers, > > tedd > Bye, Jan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
