On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:41:43 +0000 Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk allegedly wrote:
On 14 Jan 15:25, Adam Bower wrote:
THANKS FOR THAT BRETT VERY USEFUL LINK TA!
Thanks for that Adam... now I've had to add another line to the wiki page to suggest not SHOUTING.
(and you deliberately broke the thread... I'll come and hunt you down at the beginning of Feb if you're not careful!)
Brett
You might like to consider adding these references. I find them useful.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html - how to ask questions the smart way
http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html - List reply-to considered harmful.
http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html - Reply-to munging still considered harmful. Really
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855 - RFC 1855
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt
Mick
(and you could always add a note to the effect that very long .sigs, coupled with PGP signatures are considered a pain by some. :-) )
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------