+1
I can't speak with a lot of knowledge about this -- because when I did
find his original note, the graphic which apparently is what was viewed
as "offensive" by some, wasn't visible; there was just a generic
placeholder for a graphic. So I don't know what the graphic said. The
rest of his signature line simply gave his name, position with the
church (music director), and the statement "Peace and Love". I would
hope that no one would find any of that offensive. Again, I didn't see
the graphic so I don't know what that said.
But no matter, it does seem like we could try to be a bit more polite to
an apparent first-time poster who I'm sure has no idea that his
signature line would be viewed as offensive by some.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My $.02 here.
Perhaps his signature block was oversized. Perhaps the fellow is very proud
to belong to his church organization--and is willing to stick his neck out to
show it. I can not see how society is worse-off because of this, much less
this users list. I certainly did not take his signature block as an
invitation to join his church, nor as an act of religious proselytization.
More than likely the person had what he thought was a pressing question that
needed answered, is not particularly computer saavy, came to us for help, had
no idea what the unwritten "rules" were, and is now getting beat up by those
of us who would/should help him. No better way to turn off someone who has
an interest in our free product.
Is there anyway that we could be just a bit more patient and friendly?
Larry
On Wednesday 07 March 2007 02:20:52 pm James Knott wrote:
Michael Adams wrote:
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 07:46:21 -0600
Dan Lewis wrote:
On Wednesday March 07 2007 7:09 am, Guy Voets wrote:
2007/3/7, James Knott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
There was a large coloured block about his church. I couldn't do
a normal reply without including it. I had to create a reply,
delete everything and then cut 'n paste portions of the original
message, so that I could reply without including it.
It's bad enough that some people include such stuff in their
messages, but something else again, when I can't reply without
including it.
+1
The colored block was unnecessary. To make matters even worse, it
contained a link to how to create a similar type signature. So, I
completely agree in this case.
While I do not have any problems with a religious tone in one's
signature, a certain amount of discretion is important. Advertizing
one's church or suggesting others consider one's point of view on
religion go beyond what is proper in a signature.
In my email client i can highlight the part of an email i wish to reply
to before i click reply.
I can also normally edit the reply. However, with that message, it was
all or nothing, with the usual method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
