Yes - I guess I knew what I was asking may not be possible for some. I guess I should just count myself lucky that IBM doesn't require such measures and I have access to both intra/inter nets directly.
I've also seen ugly HTML tags .. I use gmail -- hope that isn't showing up as a mess to some? It all looks fine to me, but I follow these posts thru gmail. Please let me know - I'd hate to be creating my own form of 'junk' ;-) Scott On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Marcy Cortes <[email protected] > wrote: > Some of us don't have a choice if we are doing this from work. > As another point of consideration, please don't use HTML. It's ugly for > the folks on the digest version. > > Marcy > > "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If > you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, > you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message > or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, > please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this > message. Thank you for your cooperation." > > > > ________________________________ > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Scott Rohling > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 7:46 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [IBMVM] How long is YOUR signature/disclaimer? > > > This is a plea to all of you with signature lines with all kinds of junk > (like all those preachy quotes you might think others will appreciate) -- > and ESPECIALLY those of you with company disclaimers: > > Please find a way to post with as clean a signature as you can. > > I've run across some posts lately that are just completely ridiculous. 1 > line of question or comment followed by 100 lines of your particular > company's disclaimer. While it's very helpful at times to see where you > all work - maybe using your personal email rather than your company email is > a better idea. That way you don't have to disclaim anything and aren't > helping fill up these mailing lists with 'meta text'. > > I'm sure this will be seen as 'meta' discussion - but I'm especially cranky > today, so what the heck ;-) > > Thanks for your consideration: Scott >
