<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: signature



* Gary Johnson <garyjohn@xxxxxxxxxx> [20090410 22:55]:
> On 2009-04-10, "J. Limon" <jlimon@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 12:54:51PM -0700, Ravi Uday wrote:
> > > hi
> > > how can you make mutt enter the signature at 'cursor' position instead
> > > of appending it at the end of mail
> > > Ravi
> > 
> > What's the point of a sig *not* at the end of an email? That would
> > make it something completely different wouldn't it?
> 
> The rules for signatures are different in some corporate
> environments, so it's really nice that mutt allows the 'sig_on_top'
> option.  I set 'sig_on_top', 'indent_string', 'header' and
> 'attribution' one way for "Outlook-style" replies to senders within
> the company I work for, and another way for normal "Internet-style"
> replies to everyone else.

Indeed there is intolerance in corporate environments towards the
"proper" e-mail style as 'defined' in netiquette documents. Things
like appalling quoting style, 20 line signatures including pictures,
never trimming the e-mails you respond to etc etc ad nauseum is the
defacto corporate standard.

The times I have the misfortune in having to use Outlook (previous job
for example), I trawled through the config of Outlook to change
absolutely everything to get outgoing e-mails to conform to
netiquette. It can be done, but takes time and effort.

Sometimes, having a reputation for being a "weird Linux geek" gives
you license to do things that others would not be able to get away
with. ;) And believe me, the few people that question you about having
received a properly formatted e-mail will after a thorough explanation
and pointing towards netiquette documents stop questioning it. (Some
even alter their writing style slightly, at least by my experience.)

(And yes, I apologize for being off-topic...)

-- 
/Anders