I couldn't agree with you more that, considering the content, there in no obvious need to sign mail to a list like this, *except* for purposes other than the content. I was trying to make the point in my previous post that the reason I do it is to establish a pattern of *always* signing any email I send, for the two purposes which I outlined.On 4/27/2004 4:00 PM, Betti Ann & Preston Smith wrote:
I had no intent to turn this into a heavy discussion but the 70 plus signature.asc files I have to remove from my system daily are becoming a pain. Why oh why do we need sigs on a mailing list??
There is no need. But as it is already proven, people will continue signing mailing lists messages. No point to getting all upset about it, it will not change a thing.
- find a Windows client that meets the so called needs of the RFC which is not a mandated standard at the best of times and then train my wife on the new client before having to retrain her when I eventually move to Linux - do the gurus, particularly those who say I must scrap Eudora, know of a suitable freeware client which is supported by Windows 98?
Thunderbird[1] would do. Eudora is the mother of stupidity (among others) when it detaches attachments and place them on an 'Attach' folder that never gets cleaned. Believe me, I know, we suffered too long with the Eudora users on my College.
[1] http://www.mozilla.org/projects/thunderbird/
Cheers,
-- Fritz Whittington It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs. (Albert Einstein, 'Treasury for the Free World,' 1946)
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
