> Don't really know ... what does that Organisation do if the "bad"
> employee sends out a letter on the Company's official letterhead?

Usually letters on the Company's official letterhead, unlike an email to
usenet and public lists/forums, don't reach a thousands of people :)

But yes. I understand your point. Organisations can't block each and every
loophole.
My point : they have to block at least the ones they can. Or the most
damaging ones.
But let us not argue about this. You are right ofcourse :)

> My personal view is that legal diclaimers are redundant.  But few
> would mind a one-liner. The problem is where virtually a complete
> legal notice is attached as a "sig".

agreed 100% on this one. I said as much too.

But what I wanted to understand was why Mario found a one-liner
objectionable ?

I was looking forward to an arguement against rather than for, so as to get
an opposing point of view. Specifically, Mario's  :) ..and perhaps Raju's.

As far as I have seen, Raju has slapped people on the wrist *only* for huge
"quasi-legal" sigs, that end up being larger than the actual content of the
mail.

Mario's reaction to this one-line tag, by unsubscribing , albeit his
personal decision, seems a bit over-the-top to me. Though ofcourse, it is
his personal choice.

Regards,
Abhi


_______________________________________________________________

Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm

_______________________________________________
linux-india-help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-india-help

Reply via email to