Marck D Pearlstone wrote: TP>> I have added the cut marks because this mailing list's moderators TP>> have decided that they are important, and the list software's TP>> automatically-appended signatures do not follow the moderators own TP>> rules. However, I do wish to point out that it's a tad silly.
> What's silly is not thinking things through. How many years has this > list been running? A lot of people like to do things the way they've always done them, regardless of how appropriate those things are to the current situation. Doesn't make those way the most appropriate nor the most efficient. > Here's the facts: > o If there are two cut marks in a message, only the last is used. Is this a deficiency in The Bat! then? I don't know of any mention of this behavior in any of the RFCs, and Son of 1036 only says "signature will be delimited by <dash><dash><space>". > o Most members have signatures that already include cut marks My suggestion was not intended to cause a problem with this point. > o If we added a cut mark to the list footers, we would render useless > all previous cut marks in messages. I apologize for touching the sore spot. Alas, I was not aware of this deficiency. > p So we don't. Because it's wrong to. And we ask members to. It's > in the list rules. It is wrong to not do the right thing, whatever that is. If TB's handling of cutmarks is incorrect, then certainly the solution is to "require" the use of cut marks by all posters when the list software appends several lines of text to every message. Alternatively, the list software could *not* append that data to the message, and rather stick it into headers. > o It never pays to argue with a moderator. :gdr: I'm not intending to be argumentative. Apologies for that. Still seems silly to have my message terminated by a sig delimiter. ;) -tom! -- ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.60.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
