Re: OT: offending sig + headers
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 07:56:23PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> I'm not sure what gave you that impression. I assure you, I'm not
> interested. People provide them anyway. No offense at all meant
> (sincerely)... it's just that I've already thought this through in a
> lot of detail, and I'm very well aware of the alternative solutions,
> and I find them all unacceptable. I'm a system administrator by
> training and trade, so managing mail and spam is a part of what I do;
> I have no choice but to stay reasonably up-to-date on related
> technologies. So others' opinions, while possibly interesting from a
> philosophical perspective, are not something I'm particularly "very
> interested in receiving..." I'm pretty well-versed in the capabilities
> of the alternatives, and the pros and cons of each. I remain
> convinced that my method is technically superior to everything else,
> even if a few people on mailing lists I'm interested in participating
> in find it unpleasant.
Wow. I mean, wow.
You're missing another alternative. Just don't post.
--
Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG
dwchandler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/
http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation