Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!sys.uea!jrk
From: jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk (Richard Kennaway)
Newsgroups: news.newusers.questions
Subject: Re: Signature files
Message-ID: <693@sys.uea.ac.uk>
Date: 21 Aug 89 17:12:00 GMT
References: <15046@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <1937@prune.bbn.com> <6872@rpi.edu>
Reply-To: jrk@uea-sys.UUCP (Richard Kennaway)
Organization: University of East Anglia, Norwich
Lines: 20

In article <6872@rpi.edu> sandro@itsgw.rpi.edu (Sandro Wallach) writes:
>Meanwhile, I think I agree that signatures usually should not contain
>email information.

I disagree.  Signatures should *always* contain email information.
Several times I have found the address in someone's signature to be the
only reliable way of emailing to them.  The information in the message
header may work most of the time, but cannot be relied on.

If you put nothing else in your signature, put your email address.

>(my first       /\             //////sandro\\\\\\    For better or worse, it's
>graphic        //\\ /\        ///sandro@rpi.edu\\\   easier to obey a rule than
>dotsig-       ///\\//\\\\    /sandro@itsgw.rpi.edu\  to think for yourself.
>Nature)      ////\\//\\\\\\\/sandro@rpitsmts.bitnet\            -Life In Hell

Throw out the graphics and the motto if you like, but keep the addresses.
--
Richard Kennaway          SYS, University of East Anglia, Norwich, U.K.
uucp:  ...mcvax!ukc!uea-sys!jrk		Janet:  kennaway@uk.ac.uea.sys