-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 6/12/07, Tom Lane wrote:
> A more serious objection is that any automated tool would probably get it
> wrong sometimes, and strip important text.
>
> > I vote 'lets not bother'
>
> Right. I agree with Josh's idea about mentioning list policies in the
> subscription confirmation message, though.
Why? If the legal mumbo-jumbo has already got some precedence as being
un-enforcable (even if it's only in a handful of jurisdictions), why
give it even a patina of credibility by addressing it in a policy?
Saying that it's not applicable here implies that is is applicable
elsewhere. To quote Ghandi "first they laugh at you, then they ignore
you, then they fight you, then you win." I say we stick with the
laughing. To that end, I propose should have a policy about being
pelted with scathing sarcasm when the signal to boilerplate ratio
drops below 10:1.
Andrew
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFGbxln+zlEYLc6JJgRAuaNAJsECSRrgIqR1f5c15P7OszVa34lVgCghWSb
io55WHyChKGQVHCQ9R+z2ec=
=KNyQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----