On 18 Aug 96 01:57am, Bill Cheek wrote to Bill Funk:
 BC> Yo! Bill:
 BC> Thursday August 15 1996 19:49, Bill Funk wrote to Bill Cheek:
 BC>>> Except that digital sigs are coming into vogue everywhere else.
 BF>> They may be in vogue, but do they have anything to do with scanning?
 BF>> It seems to me that if the post isn't coded, a decoding key is simply
 BF>> not needed. As such, it becomes part of a signature line, and should
 BF>> be limited as any other sig line. As I see it.
 BC> Let me play the devil's advocate for a moment.....which is what I have
 BC> been doing anyway..........
 OK, I see what you are saying.
 I was under the impression that the actual question was whether to allow PGP
 sigs to exceed the 4-line limit on SIG's, and that's what I've been trying
 to keep this to.
 What I'm saying is this:
        If PGP sigs are coded messages, they would seem to be illegal under
        FIDO rules.
        If not, then they seem to be part of SIGs, and as such, should be
        subject to the rules for them.
 Did I miss something? If so, I'll re-think.
Bill Funk:  Internet:  skypilot@starlink.com
	    ASCIi User Group: http://www.starlink.com:80/~ascii
... I'd love to, but my bathroom tiles need grouting.
--- Via Silver Xpress V4.00 SW12853
---------------