A few comments just to clarify some points...
>Just a note. Any posts complaining about off topicness should be
>addressed to the person who started the off topicness in the first
>place. Not to one who just added a couple of sentences expanding on
>the original claim.
I agree. Except of course on those lists where the rules require all
complaints to be directed to the moderator.
>Also, pulling up a person's sign off message
The proper term for this is "signature".
>and discussing whether it
>is off topic is in itself off topic.
Actually, a discussion of what is "appropriate" or whether something is
against the list rules (if there are any) would be a meta-topic.
Meta-topics are allowed unless expressly forbidden by the rules/moderator.
Otherwise it would be impossible to discuss whether it is possible to
discuss something.
>Sign off messages (whether
>automatic or manually written in after a person's signature) are never
>meant to be on topic or part of the discussion in the first place.
Ah. It may not be a sport you indulge in, Ken, but lots of people do. The
infamous "parting shot". On some lists the content of signatures are
tightly constrained by the rules for this reason. I've seen situations
where a mere signature has set off a flame war, or at least quietly peeved
some list members.
Fortunately we have a well-behaved list here that doesn't need lots of
rules. We can even discuss the fact that the list doesn't have lots of
rules. What a great list.
--
Terry Bowman, KA4HJH
"The Mac Doctor"
"You know, I'll bet _any_ scene from "Metropolis" would have drawn protests
from football fans"--Roger Ebert