Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!bbn!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre!pitt!blodtoad
From: blodtoad@pitt.UUCP (M. Anthony Kapolka 3)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Multiple addresses in .signature
Keywords: signature, gateways, routing optimization
Message-ID: <3524@pitt.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jun 88 15:07:13 GMT
References: <1217@odyssee.UUCP>
Reply-To: blodtoad@vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu.UUCP (M. Anthony Kapolka 3)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science
Lines: 46

In article <1217@odyssee.UUCP> pinard@odyssee.UUCP (Francois Pinard) writes:
>
>and I'm interested in an honest discussion on this.  I'm still amazed
>by the incredible frequency of those huge .signatures, with four,
>five, six, seven addresses in them.  Do people really check seven
>mailboxes each morning, on X different machines?  Why don't we have
>*one* address each.  This gives me the impression that everybody is
>trying to solve everybody else's problems, instead of solving their
>own.

I think most people have the X-1 machines forwarding mail to the 
account that they use.

Any reason why we shouldn't solve other's problems?  I think most people on
the net can specify their address more easily then they can keep track of 
their sites mailer software.

>proceed to mail to them?  Don't BizarreNet people know how to get out
>to other nets, including the famous MyOwnNet?

No.  I have computer-ignorant friends who have trouble getting from bitnet 
to uucp.  I have a bitnet account.  Why cause them hassle?

>is *my* problem, at least as Postmaster, to know how to get onto
>Bitnet, Internet, CHUnet and elsewhere, and to automate this as far as
>possible for my users.  I'm not waiting, if someone from Bitnet writes

You are a responsible postmaster.  Many are too busy with other things to
worry about a small percentage of the mail that passes through.

>data) instead of spoiling every .signature, including mine.  Is'nt
>that reasonnable?

Spoiling in what sense?  Asthetics?  The two lines of dashes in *your* .sig
certainly aren't cost efficient.  No offense intended, but I'd rather see
two lines of funny addresses...

>-------------------    ---------    ------------------------------------------
>Francois Pinard        "Vivement    C.P. 886, L'Epiphanie (Qc), Canada J0K 1J0
>pinard@odyssee.uucp       GNU!"     (514)588-4656; Odyssee R.A.: (514)279-0716
>-------------------    ---------    ------------------------------------------

     M. Anthony Kapolka III       /     The Electric Eclectic UNIX Box
 kapolka@vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu    |    1200 Baud, 8-N-1, (412)-431-UNIX
     anthony@PITTVMS.bitnet       |  ..{cadre, allegra}!pitt!idis!formtek!
..{cadre, allegra}!pitt!kapolka	  /         ditka!eklektik!anthony