16 May 09 13:26, Ross Cassell wrote to Roy Witt:

 RW>> Attempted religious debate noted.

 RC> The mentioning of religion of innocent discussing of same isnt out of
 RC> bounds here..

How about super long sig lines that are repugnant to other users. It's one
thing to have a sig line, but one that sets itself up as a controversial
issue which doesn't relate to politics is something else.

 RC> What I want to avoid is cases when relgious debate dominates the echo
 RC> or more to the point, the type of debate that was imbibed in by a
 RC> certain person.

As you saw with Tom Walker's reply to my 'sucker' line; mentioning
anything about religion allows for someone else with a controversial view
to be 'suckered into' a debate about how his view disagrees with the sig
line. That in itself can lead to a whole 'nuther debate just like the one
you stopped. I would have mentioned this in netmail, but I thought an
example would illustrate it better than a complaint.

                R\%/itt


--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000