[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Find first line FOLLOWING a sequence of matches

From: Bob Proulx
Subject: Re: Find first line FOLLOWING a sequence of matches
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:37:32 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

Robert Thorpe wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
> > Subhan Michael Tindall wrote:
> >> This message is intended for the sole use of the individual and
> >> entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> >
> > READ CAREFULLY.  By reading this email, you agree, on behalf of your
> > employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from
> I don't think there is anything to worry about here.

Were you worried?  I wasn't worried.  I was annoyed by the clueless
and useless email disclaimer.  Those are such a waste of space.  We
shouldn't even be giving it any discussion time.

If someone's company forces that upon their email then out of common
decency they should use different email when interacting with the
public outside of their company business.  There are many free email
providers available that won't abuse the users in that way.

Here is one of many classic references on the topic.  There are many more.

> Read what it says in the second sentence:
> > If you are not the intended addressee, nor authorized to
> > receive for the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you
> > may not use, copy, disclose or distribute to anyone the message or
> > any information contained in the message.
> This paragragh that Subhan Michael Tindall added to the end of the email

Probably his company's mail server added it to the bottom of his mail
for him.  That is the usual cause of those disclaimers.  Of course it
was sent to a public mailing list that has many archivers.  Basically
the modern day equivalent of publishing it in a newspaper with world
wide readership.

> is only directed at people who are not the intended addressee.
> E.g. people who have read the email by sniffing a plain-test network
> connection, or have read it by opening someone else's mail archive.
> The third sentence is simply a request.
> I'm not a lawyer, but I'd say it's fairly harmless.

I disagree.  Clueless useless disclaimers such as those do harm the
community.  They are rude.  They are completely insane.  They consume
bandwidth and for those who pay metered bandwidth it does actually
cost them more money.  They consume diskspace and waste our time
avoiding reading them.  Think of the kittens!

The standard etiquette is that email may contain few lines of
signature only.  The accepted guideline is no more than four lines.
See RFC 1855 for example.

When I am annoyed by stupid email disclaimers I add a disclaimer of my
own.  Which is what I did on the previous message.  That one comes
from the writer Cory Doctorow.  It is called the reasonable
disclaimer.  At least it is reasonable.


By sending an email to ANY of my addresses you are agreeing that:
I am by definition, "the intended recipient".
All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and make
such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it lends
itself to. In particular, I may quote it on the net.
I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality that may
be included on your message.
Unless you are named "Arnold P. Fasnock", you may read only the "odd
numbered words" (every other word beginning with the first) of the
message above. If you have violated that, then you hereby owe the
sender 10 GBP for each even numbered word you have read.
If you feel you have received this message in error then add two cups
flour, 1/3rd cup butter, 1/3rd cup yogurt, 1/2 cup sugar, 2 eggs, 1
teaspoon baking soda, pinch of salt, mix in three very ripe bananas
plus walnuts to taste and bake at 350F for one hour.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]