RE: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

RE: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

[CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM]

Hi Andrew et al.,

> > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the 
> > addressee only. 

> Please do not send such attachments to this list.  We cannot read your
> mails.

Why not? The addressee is the list and all the members of that list. I
dont' see anything at odds with the legal signature.  Also, you evidently
can read my mails, as you have done so and are now responding to me! I am
writing in confidence to this list, that is - I am confident that my words
are going to end up with the list's recipients.

> If there is no way you can send mail from your location without such
> attachments, there are web-based services you can use.

You're right - there's nothing I can do about it.

If you feel so strongly about this then I can use a web gateway if they
are not prohibited here, but it's never been a problem before - either 
on this list or many of the others to which I belong. 

I can always reply from my home account and remove all signs of a signature,
but what of people who only have access at work?

Regards,
David.

RE: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

[Andrew Haley]

CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM writes:
 > Hi Andrew et al.,
 > 
 > > > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the 
 > > > addressee only. 
 > 
 > > Please do not send such attachments to this list.  We cannot read your
 > > mails.
 > 
 > Why not? The addressee is the list and all the members of that list.

http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html:


Policies

Please do not include or reference confidentiality notices, like:

    The referring document contains privileged and confidential
    information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not
    disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it, and we
    request that you notify companyname immediately.

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.

Andrew.

Re: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

[Andrew Haley]

Daniel Berlin writes:
 > 
 > 
 > 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.

Thanks, Dan.  I'm going to cut and keep this reply of yours for the
next time this question comes up...

Andrew.

Re: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

[Daniel Berlin]

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

RE: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc optimizations information

[CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM]

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.

Regards,
David.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Haley [mailto:aph@redhat.com] 
> Sent: 12 March 2007 16:40
> To: CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM
> Cc: 'Sunzir Deepur'; gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: Signatures Was: where can I get gcc 
> optimizations information
> 
> CARTER-HITCHIN, David, GBM writes:
>  > Hi Andrew et al.,
>  > 
>  > > > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the 
>  > > > addressee only. 
>  > 
>  > > Please do not send such attachments to this list.  We 
> cannot read your
>  > > mails.
>  > 
>  > Why not? The addressee is the list and all the members of 
> that list.
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html:
> 
> 
> Policies
> 
> Please do not include or reference confidentiality notices, like:
> 
>     The referring document contains privileged and confidential
>     information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not
>     disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it, and we
>     request that you notify companyname immediately.
> 

> 
> Andrew.
>