On Nov 19, 2007 9:13 PM, Rob Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: snip > Hey, if Randal can get upset by daft disclaimers, why can't someone else > take offence at a long advertising sig? snip
People can do whatever they want, but there is always the question of reasonableness. Schwartz's sig is four lines long and contains information about who he is and what he does: snip Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! snip Versus the original sig that was complained about (over 10 lines that contain no useful information at all): snip - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman Brothers. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without notice. -------- IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Please be advised that any discussion of U.S. tax matters contained within this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding U.S. tax related penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. snip I can see having some issues with the last line of Schwartz's sig, but it is no worse than the random ads attached to Yahoo or AOL emails. At least it is on topic. The person who complained about Schwartz's sig also complained about him being vague and seemed to imply that he was not being helpful here because it might hurt his consulting business. This is just ridiculous. Vague and unhelpful are not two adjectives I would associate with Schwartz. Harsh, unsympathetic, sardonic, and correct on the other hand... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://learn.perl.org/
