On Saturday 13 March 2021 23:25:53 David Wright wrote: > On Fri 12 Mar 2021 at 22:50:48 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Friday 12 March 2021 21:18:16 David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 12 Mar 2021 at 18:36:09 (-0500), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Friday 12 March 2021 17:13:40 David Wright wrote: > > > > > On Thu 11 Mar 2021 at 15:00:06 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 14:49:51 -0400 Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z wrote: > > > > > > > Does it work if I rather put this signature at the end of > > > > > > > every message? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Time zone: GMT-4 > > > > > > > Months: Ene = Jan ; Abr = Apr ; Ago = Aug ; Dic = Dec > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the time zone is redundant, as it is indicated in > > > > > > the time/date stamp on your emails, as indicated above. > > > > > > > > > > It only works with the first level of attribution, because the > > > > > next person to quote the quote may have a different timezone > > > > > in their header. > > > > > > > > > > And that leaves aside the problem of attributions that have > > > > > been silently converted into the quoter's timezone, with or > > > > > without a new TZ being specified). > > > > > > > > > > Plus, it does appear that there are MUAs that attribute the > > > > > time of a quote to the time at which the replier *started > > > > > their reply* to the original email, which is completely > > > > > bizarre. (There are several such MUAs posting here.) > > > > > > > > Care to point some fingers at them? > > > > > > As long as it's clear I'm pointing at the technology, not the > > > user. > > > > > > Hot off the press: > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/03/msg00735.html > > > > > > This pair is odd; is the MUA using the time of arrival of the > > > OP at some location? > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/12/msg00968.html > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/12/msg00970.html > > > > Might the OP be useing a hot spot? > > Oh, these suggestions were just straws I was grasping at. > > For example, someone using a getmail-a-like might latch on > to the time of that transfer (local time, in localised format …) > and prefer it to the proper Date:. > > And the time of reply would be an obvious consequence of > evaluating $(date) rather than $(date --date="… …") from > the Date: field. > > > Well, at least it isn't me. KMail has been good for me for around 2 > > decades, and the tde version has been quite solid, generally > > speaking. > > Heh, heh, you'd have heard about it before now. :)
Without a doubt, David, there are folks here who know far more than I about the finer points. And the proper attitude is to welcome the education. Unforch, I am observing a huge rejection of that idea over on the clamav list. And its getting damned boring. > Cheers, > David. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>