Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 7/7/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!jeff
From: jeff@rlgvax.UUCP (Jeffrey Kegler)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Signatures
Message-ID: <882@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 23-Jul-83 16:18:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.882
Posted: Sat Jul 23 16:18:09 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 23-Jul-83 22:17:42 EDT
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 28

I was grateful to learn of the .signature feature.  I do not know what to
make of the complaint about signatures being too long.  Having not
said 'n' to the article, and then read it to the end, can one begrudge 
a little white space?  While I think some signatures are too whimsical
and long-winded for my taste, that is just a matter of personality.  So I
cannot see any harm in any of the signatures I have seen on the net.

If someone finds the return address information these provide to be
unnecessary, they must fall into one of two extremes--either their
knowledge of the various nets, their interconnections, conventions and
idiosyncrasies transcends anything I have ever encountered, or else they
are rather inexperienced and naive about the difficulties of sending
netmail.  I think everyone should include a signature, because the header
does not tell me enough, and if the article is worth sending (another
topic, entirely) it is well worth knowing how to get in touch with the
sender.  Headers are often mangled by the time they reach us, and even when
not, they only state the path by which mail *did* reach us.  This path may
well be impossible to reverse ("demand" one-way and "polled" the other) or
go through sites which forward news but not mail.  Rarely do I see the
header on a news item give a path which at all resembles the best one back.

               Jeffrey Kegler
               CCI Office Systems Division (formerly RLG)
               ...{allegra,seismo,mcnc,lime,we13,brl-bmd}!rlgvax!jeff

P.S.  Apparently the .signature feature does not work here, though it is
in the source code.  My apologies to those receiving this
article on the importance of signatures without a signature.