Post by thread:[OT]: Newbie needs help

Moved to [OT] was [PIC] >-----Original Message----- >From: spam_OUTpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTmit.edu [.....piclist-bouncesKILLspam@spam@mit.edu] >On Behalf Of Nate Duehr >Sent: 25 November 2004 16:23 >To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. >Subject: Re: [PIC]: Newbie needs help > > >p.s. The above disclaimer is worthless, and yet many IT Departments >require them. They've been shot down multiple times under U.S. law as >an invalid contract... there's no "acceptance" or "negotiation" stages >(similar to the reasons that many "shrink-wrap" licenses are >also being >thrown out in court cases), so they're non-binding and a total >waste of >bandwidth. If your company lawyers require them, they're idiots and >don't understand how to apply case law. Tell me about it, I personaly think it's a pointless waste of ours and the recipients bandwidth. It seems like it's just "fashionable" for companies to have them now. Mike ======================================================================= This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use, forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or services. ======================================================================= ____________________________________________

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Alan B. Pearce wrote: >>> Why not just *enable* digital signing whenever you >>> (and the receivers !) realy *need* it ? >>> >>> >> That's like saying that you should only lock your car >> when you know somebody is going to steal it! > > Well I have yet to find a real use for digital signing of email, but do lock > my car. It's about impersonation. I guess you can wait until it happens to you. Like someone using your email to spread a virus (in your name). Happened to me. You don't really want 15% of the people you want to talk to to be unreachable because their admins blacklisted your origin. Peter ____________________________________________

> > > > Justin Fielding wrote: > > > >> Yep we have had sooooo many examples of perfectly valid HTML/CSS > >not > working properly in IE or Firefox. > > > > > > If you want to continue this thread, please use another [tag]. > > Rob. > > > > lol, someone had to moan eventually. Imagine you are chatting with > some friends and as the conversation goes on, the topic naturally > changes. I can't imagine someone saying 'You are not on the original > topic, please go somewhere else if you want to carry on chatting'. If > they did I can imagine they would be told to **** off ;) > > Justin. What does that have to do with the [tag]?? David On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:01:43 +0200 Justin Fielding <justinfieldingKILLspamyahoo.co.uk> wrote: -- David Koski .....davidKILLspam.....KosmosIsland.com ____________________________________________

part 1 5162 bytes content-type:multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; (decoded 7bit) This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms030600020000060609010203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok, there we go. James Newtons Massmind wrote: {Quote hidden}>otnm message > >Just a quick note: the below listed post, which you sent to the PICLIST, has >nothing to do with PICs and [PIC]: was at the start of the subject line. >Putting this tag at the beginning of the subject line, causes the message to >be sent to people who have requested that only posts directly related to the >PIC be sent to them. Consider instead adding one of the following: > >[EE]: > This label is for topics that, while not necessarily about PICs, are >of general interest to the EE community. > >[AD]: > This label is for posts adverstising a commercial product or >service. > >[OT]: > This label is for posts that are completely off the topic of PICs. > > >The rest of this message is long winded B.S. Feel free to ignore it: > >Please understand, I really don't want to offend you or in any way >discourage you from posting your valuable information (or funny remarks ><GRIN>) to the PICLIST. > >I'm just pointing out that people who only want to read engineering post >about the PIC would not be able to filter out your post by setting up the >list server or their email program to delete non-PIC subjects. > >If you remember to add [EE]:, [OT]:, or [AD]: you can help retain people >(resources) on the list who don't have time or bandwidth to follow >non-[PIC]: posts. > >You can post just about anything to the PIC list. Just mark the tread [OT]: >and that's enough for us. If list members don't like it... they can filter >it.... > >As I have advised other before, if a list member doesn't like something said >in a post they can send the "offenders" <GRIN> a private email asking them >to mark [OT]s. If they get buried, maybe they will. ..or maybe they will >drop off the list and then part of the SIGNAL will be gone forever rather >than just buried in the noise. I don't want to loose your signal and I won't >keep sending you this "reminder" email if you reply and tell me to stop. > >My goal is to keep people (like Tjaart, Scott Dattalo, and others and YOU) >from leaving the list rather than have their valuable time wasted by a rash >of off topic posts that are not tagged correctly. > >Thanks for taking the time to read this. If you have other questions about >how to get the most out of the PICList, please see the PICList FAQ at: >http://www.piclist.com > >James Newton, PICList Admin #3 >EraseMEjamesnewtonspam_OUTTakeThisOuTpiclist.com phone:1-619-652-0593 >PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com > >--- >James. > > > > > >>{Original Message removed}