On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 04:31:12PM +0000, s. keeling wrote: > Celejar <celejar@gmail.com>: > > > > I see your point about offensiveness, but I'll point out that the OT > > thread I started (Good, evil, etc) was a response to a sig that I felt > > attacked religion unfairly. Many people use quite provocative sigs, > > ridiculing (often wittily) political or religious views they oppose. If > > we demand that posts be inoffensive, I counter-request that people cut > > the offensive sigs. > > No. Think about what you're saying. Sigs are a time honoured > practice, and if you don't like one, hit delete and move on. Or, if > you prefer, email 'em off-list and tell 'em what you think. You've no > right to tell them what to think, say, or write. > So, let me see if I understand this. The things for which Michelle, Ron, Michael, Johannes, Judd, Florian and I were criticized, because they were supposedly offensive, would be OK as long as they were in a sig? Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature