This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information
- From: "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: "CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM" <David dot CARTER-HITCHIN at rbos dot com>
- Cc: "Andrew Haley" <aph at redhat dot com>, "Sunzir Deepur" <sunzird at gmail dot com>, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:03:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information
- References: <3B4C77997DD0254B86D3C9454476B6BC0F03EC20@lonms00812.fm.rbsgrp.net>
On 3/12/07, CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM <David.CARTER-HITCHIN@rbos.com> wrote:
Hello Andrew (once again),
> Such disclaimers are inappropriate for mail sent to public lists. If
> your company automatically adds something like this to outgoing mail,
> and you can't convince them to stop, you might consider using a free
> web-based e-mail account.
I have at least two of these, and they're both banned here at work, hence
my point about people not being able to interact with the list, who work
in such organisations.
We're sorry, but thousands of people are not going to possibly take on
liability and risk simply because your company believes it is a good
idea to add disclaimers to mails.
If this means you can't interact with people, maybe your company
should reconsider it's stance on attempting to foist the liability and
risk of using email onto others (which is effectively what these
disclaimers do). If they won't, we're sorry, but we're doing this to
avoid burdening thousands of people who can use the list without
having to worry about these things.
You can, of course, argue that these disclaimers mean nothing, and are
worse than useless, but at least i'm not willing to spend the tens of
thousands of dollars it would cost in court to prove it for each
different one i receive.
IAAL,
Dan