brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (03/18/85)
I have often seen articles that say, "If you don't want to read an article, hit the 'n' key", or "If you don't want to see a large signature just hack your news reader not to print it." Such postings miss the point. If this were the point, I would have no complaint (although I might point out my N key is due to wear out any day). The point is that this $millon/year net is being paid for and all the noise ups the cost. While some people may put interesting quotes in their signatures, that's really not their purpose. If they really are new information they should be communicated as such, not as extra information tacked onto the real new information the user wanted to read and pay for. But quotes are tolerable compared to some things we get. People's POSTAL addresses!!! For all the gigabytes of news that have flowed, has anybody ever gotten a response to an article in the postal mail? Ever? (Without an electronic mail message as well, of course) And your home address as well as office address? Why do you want me to see all that? Even phone numbers are on a thin edge. I once got a phone response to an article, so they have some validity, but no more than one phone number is really needed in most cases. And of course we have the 300 different routes to get to me stuff. I suppose in the crazy net we have there is some justification for this, but hopefully proper software will soon eliminate this. I had hoped it already had in most places. Finally we get our friend the cute picture. I'm glad we're paying for sending these. I swear that some people must think that the longer their article is, the more impressed people will be. Here's a hint - for me it's exactly the reverse. As for Organization. This was granted the high-cost status of a header line to remove the confusion about who and where a poster is. Since people move around, it was put in an environment variable so users could post from a place that is unusal for them and still have the right organization. I would like to thank all the people who have been kind enough to inform me that they are in "The Warlock's Cave" or in "Plaid Heaven." That feature is not there for the poster, it's there for the reader. Please remember that. -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) (03/19/85)
I would second Brad's comments, with one slight modification:
if you're looking for serious information, it's acceptable to
put in your postal address. I have had cases of my postings getting
printed off and eventually reaching someone who not only couldn't
reply on-line, they wouldn't even know how to go about it. In such
cases I do receive physical mail and phone calls.
Brad is right, though: for about 95% of the articles on the net,
postal addresses and phone numbers are TOTALLY UNNECESSARY.
Dave Sherman
--
{utzoo pesnta nrcaero utcs hcr}!lsuc!dave
{allegra decvax ihnp4 linus}!utcsri!lsuc!davechuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) (03/21/85)
In article <253@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes: >As for Organization. This was granted the high-cost status of a header line >to remove the confusion about who and where a poster is. Since people move >around, it was put in an environment variable so users could post from a >place that is unusal for them and still have the right organization. I >would like to thank all the people who have been kind enough to inform me >that they are in "The Warlock's Cave" or in "Plaid Heaven." That feature is >not there for the poster, it's there for the reader. Please remember that. Since Brad (not so) concidentally use two of my previous organizations as examples (but left out my current one, I might add...) I think I ought to explain the rationale for the organizations I use and signatures. Organizations: One very good reason for me to use an organization line different than 'National Semiconductor, Santa Clara' {the default for my site} is simply that in many cases, while National is supportive of what I do on the net, I am not specifically speaking as a representative of National. 'Chuq Von Rospach, National Semiconductor' brings forward a much more official position than 'chuq von rospach, the warlocks cave'. There ARE times when I am speaking from the companies viewpoint, and if I wasn't so lazy I probably should change the organization line or something, but the places where I do act in that way are limited (sucgh as net.micro.16k). For me, this is a reasonable alternative to the growing tendency to put disclaimers all over the place-- they tend to be a couple to 6 lines long where they exist. Secondarily, I try to minimize the tendency of the network to depersonalize things, and this is a rather inexpensive (volume/cost/time/hassle) way of doing so-- the organization says something about me, more or less... Signatures: For once I'll agree with Brad. Signatures are out of control. Mailing addresses, LARGE return addresses, etc... are annoying at best. pictures and other cutesies, especially static cutsies, are a pain. disclaimers are an unfortunate necessity (hmm, how about a new header line, Disclaimer: so we can turn it off in rn? *grin*) (double hmm, how about a header line for signatures and get them out of the message body? *grin?*). If you look at my signature (at the end of the article) you will see the following fields: . who I am (chuq von rospach, national semiconductor) . how to find me (both uucp and arpa, total of six backbone returns) . a blank line . a 'quote of the week' total cost, depending on quote, 4 lines minimum, 6 lines maximum because I am very careful to keep the quote of the week short. total char costs is less than 500 chars worst case, currently 130 chars. this signature does everything you need a signature to do except disclaim. With the enclosed return address, you can get to me from almost anywhere in about 4 hops, and EVERYONE should be able to find one of those backbones (if only ihnp4....). I have seen signatures recently moving towards 15 lines, which is outrageous. I won't mention names, but there are signatures coming out of places like fluke with return addresses that need pathalias to parse. You can argue (and some do) with my Quote of the week, of course-- I get occasional hate mail for it. I also get not so occasional comments, reference requests, congratulations, suggestions, submissions, and the like. Last time I counted, mail FOR these little depersonalization things was about 5 to 1 ahead the hate mail-- for once the people that like something did something other than stay silent, and I find that significant. I consider the single largest problem on Usenet to be that of depersonalization-- the tendency to forget that the other side of the terminal is human, too, and I do what I can to emphasize that. Signatures, since they are seen every time you post (sometimes, twice... *sigh*) need to be thought out VERY carefully. Unfortunately, there are those that don't. But signatures DO play a very useful role. chuq -- Chuq Von Rospach, National Semiconductor {cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA Be seeing you!
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (03/24/85)
Yes, Brad, people do respond to things by postal mail. I have gotten several responses via paper mail in the past. However, they were all from Christians trying to convert me. They obtained my address from the phone company, apparently. I agree that postal addresses in signature lines are superfluous. But as for weird organizations: Loosen up, guy. Why see red over nothing? Are you REALLY upset because you can't look at the printing of the organization and see that Chuq is at National Semiconductor? I doubt it. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"
bytebug@pertec.UUCP (roger long) (04/19/85)
I think we'd all save a *LOT* more money if people would be more
careful about how many lines they included from previous articles. On
especially hot topics we find the same lines going back and forth
across the country in *many* messages! I can only understand this sort
of thing if someone is responding to an article on a point-by-point
basis.
--
roger long
pertec computer corp
{ucbvax!unisoft | scgvaxd | trwrb | felix}!pertec!bytebug