[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Signing emails on the list [Was Re: Is there a *console* screen capture]



On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 10:57:25AM +0200, debian-user-request@lists.debian.org wrote:
> > From hastings@bmail.kek.jp Fri Aug  1 01:30:57 2003
> > 
> > 
> > * Alan Connor <alanconnor@earthlink.net> [030801 14:17]:
> > > 
> > > Please don't clutter your posts with pgp signatures. 
> > 
> > Clutter? Says he with the five line signature!
> 
> Yes. You are partly right and I have corrected my sig. Thank you.
> 
> But you are also partly wrong, because my sig at least conveys
> potentially useful information.

Useful? I don't know, it conveys your opinion, of course I could argue
that that isn't even potentially useful ;-)

> > > Most of us don't have the software to interpret them
> > 
> > Speak for yourself.
> 
> Well, very few people use pgp signatures on the list.....
> 
> Some may HAVE the software, but have the good taste not to use it when
> there is no point.

You are right there. Are you equally bothered if the signature ends up
in an attachment?

I can't help thinking of something Phil Zimmermann mentioned in some
text I read (I think he was the author). Some governments re trying to
ban electronic encryption that they don't have a back door to so he
encouraged everyone to use it, simply due to the practical difficulties
with prohibiting something that everyone is doing. One might see signing
emails as taking a stand for strong, cheap electronic encryption
available to the masses.

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning  mailto:therning@sourceforge.natlab.research.philips.com
PGP:0xD3BC7468  +31-40-2745179  http://pww.innersource.philips.com/magnus/

Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
     -- Douglas Adams

Attachment: pgpvzcqDXV30g.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: