Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sco!davidbe
From: davidbe@sco.COM (The Cat in the Hat)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: implicit disclaimer
Keywords: good idea support
Message-ID: <1232@scorn.sco.COM>
Date: 10 Jan 90 19:58:13 GMT
References: <7276@shlump.nac.dec.com> <21679@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Sender: news@sco.COM
Reply-To: davidbe@sco.COM (The Cat in the Hat)
Distribution: na
Organization: The Sixty Clever Orators
Lines: 21


She said that he said that she said that rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) said:
-I too support the idea of a notice about implied disclaimers.
-Of course, those disclaimers give some people a chance to get
-creative and cute; I guess they'll just have to create cute
-dozen-line .sig files.

The thing about implied disclaimers is that they overlook those times
when a person *does* speak for their organization.

Personally, I don't think it's any big deal, whether a disclaimer is there
or not.  I have one in my .sig because I have to have one, but it also doesn't
take up much space.  People who have long disclaimers are going to continue
to have them, whether a disclaimer is implied or not; they do it because they
want to.  So what's it matter?

-- 
       David Bedno aka davidbe@sco.COM: Speaking from but not for SCO.

Is talk.lists a good idea?			     Is talk.lists a bad idea?
   mail yesvote@sco.COM		Vote ends 2/5		mail novote@sco.COM