On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 14:23:07 -0700 Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
auxsvr@gmail.com wrote:
So, if one puts part of his slanderous answer in a signature, that means that the project condones this behaviour?
The project *ignores* stuff in a sig. It is not part of the content of the discussion. It may come from a random sig generator. It can be a quote that the author of the note MAY not even agree with -- it simple is a quote from some random source. To get worked up about it is illogical, a sign of insecurity, and perhaps even illness, so if the foo fits, wear it -- i.e. the more you complain about it, the more you assert to everyone that it applied to you.
Ignore? It's amzing that the various rules of list etiquette, in existence for decades, have so consistently been overlooked. Traditionally, signatures are not required to be relevant to a topic of a message. However, it has never been tradition to ignore signatures, especially offensive or outrageous ones, whether they are a quote or quip. Admins are not bound by law to permit intolerant, offensive or other outrageous speech. They have discretion and authority, and obligation, to delete offensive messages or ban members for being jerks. And to tell someone they're being unreasonable regarding some offensive remark in a signature--Then all women must be unreasonable. And ill. How do you want people to think of you? Your signature is a reflection of you and it is how people will see you. A lot of lists strip out the signature. And a lot of people use filters that strip signatures. These might be useful to help keep people from letting everyone else know how big a jerk they are. jd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org