Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shawn McMahon wrote: >> If you object to my signatures, procmail is easily capable of routing >> all of my emails to /dev/null. > > the issue wasn't a personal accusation. you're welcome to sign (or not > sign) your emails as you wish. > > in any event, the intent was not to start a flamewar here, or suggest > that you stop signing your mails, but simply to present another opinion > to the original poster.
I'd just like to hear, why signing PGP for mails going to mailing lists is not so wanted thing to do? And yes, I agree 100% - let's not start a flamewar or anything. The whole thing is, that I'm a newbie to the whole Pretty Good Privacy and GnuPG, so it started to interest me, especially in email use. That's why I originally posted a question in mutt-user, as I was unable to get it working in Mutt. But yeah - what is so bad in PGP signed mails in mailing lists? -- Jussi Ekholm | A Elbereth Gilthoniel, silivren penna m�riel i Adanedhel | o menel aglar elenath! Na-chaered palan-d�riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] | o galadhremmin ennorath, Fanuilos le linnathon http://ekhowl.goa-head.org | nef aear, s� nef aearon
msg25963/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
