On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:56:27 -0400 Philip Janus said:
>What I find odd is that you'd ban her for having a URL in her .sig. My
>guidelines may not be as strict, but no one likes spam, so I've suggested
>to a few commercial reps to put ad info in their .sig. I have to agree
>with her- if you allow anyone to put funny quotes, home pages, etc in
>their .sigs, then it should be "anyone".
>A .sig ad, IMHO, is virtually harmless. (Provided the commercial
>individual isn't posting drivel for the sake of getting the .sig on the
>list).
>
 
This is the problem.  When do you start to limit .sigs?  I don't want
to limit .sigs altogether, because some .com sites represent, for
example, academic publishers and some .edu subscribers are pushing
their own material.
    And I have no problem warning people with 20 line commercial
.sigs, but .sqn.com has managed to find the grey area.
    .sqn.com is on all my lists, but they are all set to review.
One list is on a version of Listserv that doesn't support review
and I dropped him from that one.
    What they usually do is drop in a one-line comment or question
that is just within the list topic just to use the .sig.  They never
engage in further discussion.
    My understanding is that they have been a "considerable presence" :-)
in the news.groups and even Usenet groups are fed up with their
.sigs.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Elliott Parker                   Bitnet: 3ZLUFUR@CMUVM
List Owner, SEASIA-L and CARR-L  Internet: [log in to unmask]
Department of Journalism         Less certain possibilities:
Central Michigan University         [log in to unmask]
Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 USA          CompuServe: 70701,520
Office tele: +1 517 774 3196        The WELL: [log in to unmask]