Please Remove the Defualt Signature from New Accounts - Page 2

FromLine · 14 Mar 2003, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David
I think that existing policy, re mandatory signatures files, for guest accounts should stay as is. Everyone who pays for a fastmail account wants fastmail to be successful, as a company. If guest accounts are all that anyone wants or needs, there will be no incentive for them ever to upgrade their account.

For Guest accounts, if there was no tagline, I might agree with that.

However, for guest accounts, there's a mandatory tagline that has a link to fastmail.fm . So the tagline is what's there in exchange for the free service and there's an incentive to upgrade to Member/Full/Enhanced to remove the tagline.

The signature, on the other hand, is far more personal in nature. Also, no need to redundantly advertise @fastmail.fm when there's http://www.fastmail.fm in the tagline immediately below it.

flashbang · 14 Mar 2003, 04:56 AM

I also agree. I think that displaying personal info should be the choice of the user.
FB

David · 14 Mar 2003, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FromLine
For Guest accounts, if there was no tagline, I might agree with that.

However, for guest accounts, there's a mandatory tagline that has a link to fastmail.fm . So the tagline is what's there in exchange for the free service and there's an incentive to upgrade to Member/Full/Enhanced to remove the tagline.

The signature, on the other hand, is far more personal in nature. Also, no need to redundantly advertise @fastmail.fm when there's http://www.fastmail.fm in the tagline immediately below it.

FromLine:
I agree that the personal signature should be private and that the default should be to include no text at all. I thought that the script looked at the sig file for guest users. If it did not find: http://www.fastmail.fm in their it inserted a tag line (inside the sig file) But it could be that the tag line is inserted below the sig file. When you stated.
------------------
Let the user decide for themselves whether ther they want a signature on their emails or not.
------------------
I thought that the intent was to by pass the sending of the tag line. Which was a wrong assumption on my part. My apologies.
Dave

Isaac · 14 Mar 2003, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by elvey
The default sig really needs to be changed for aliases, but for the main account, who would want to be anonymous? Why's it a big deal?

I'm not saying people are trying to be anonymous. I just don't want FastMail putting anything in my default sig without telling me clearly. The advertising is clearly stated, but this thing isn't.

hadaso · 14 Mar 2003, 06:23 AM

1. All the info in the initial signature is also in the initial FromLine. If the user is knowledgeable enough to change the default personality, it should be expected that the user is also smart enough to change the signature.

2. On the other hand, since all this info is in the FromLine, there is absolutely no need for that initial signature. On account setup the default should be no signature.

3. A wizard, or some screen that walks the new user through the most basic options would be very good, since all the available options fastmail has is quite overwhelming for a new user.

4. To avoid the problem of getting the wrong signature with a personality by mistake, it would be handy to have some variables that can go in the signature, and use the values from the personality, or from the FromLine. then something like:

Code:

%NAME%
%FROM%

would resolve to the name from the personality and the email address from the "From:" field (that might be entered using the # method). This way one default signature can work with many different personalities. (And finally for those of us who can never be satisfied:an extra variables field in every personality that holds <varname,string> pairs so we can really program our signatures

)

P.S.
Elvey, I remember the days when signature meant that typing "~A" I would get " Sincerely, Ofer Hadas." and typing "~a" I would get "bye, Ofer."

~a

Isaac · 14 Mar 2003, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hadaso
1. All the info in the initial signature is also in the initial FromLine. If the user is knowledgeable enough to change the default personality, it should be expected that the user is also smart enough to change the signature.

That's all well and good, if the user knows that the signature is there to begin with. But it's not very well stated at the moment.

Isaac
.

marsupilami · 14 Mar 2003, 07:35 AM

Hi FromLine,

Quote:

Originally posted by FromLine
When a new person signs up for an account, at the end of each email, we see:Please remove the automatic Defualt Signature from new accounts.

(BTW: Why the quote is big instead of the new text in this forum?)

Let the user decide for themselves whether then want a signature on their emails or not

For not paying users I think it's really OK, if there are ads. And FastMail.FM use the signature of Guest-Users for ads. So signature /ON is OK so long as they don't pay for the service.

Where I absolutely agree with you, is that no service is allowed to make an outing of personal data that are given to the service for administrative purpose. Like (real) First- and Lastname. In particular when the users couldn't see this.

I can't remind, that it was in my signature, when I was new at FastMail. Hope it's only a bug!

If it's no bug, it's my second KO-criterion for FastMail.FM today.

Ciao
Mayken

FromLine · 14 Mar 2003, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by marsupilami
Where I absolutely agree with you, is that no service is allowed to make an outing of personal data that are given to the service for administrative purpose. Like (real) First- and Lastname. In particular when the users couldn't see this.

...

Hope it's only a bug!

That is an excellent point.

For example, I use Microsoft Outlook email client at work.

When we have a signature in our emails, the signature is on display and viewable in our text compose screen.

Fastmail, to the contrary, the signature is not displayed or shown, so a user when composing and email message only sees a completely blank compose box.

This is my main concern that newbie users and less sophisticated users, as supported by some respondants of this thread, were completely oblivious and unaware that this was being appened and displayed after they click on the "Send" button.

I'm not trying to go on a crusade here to remove the signature or take issue with the format. My concern is that it should be the users choice and discretion - with full educational awareness.

anj · 14 Mar 2003, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mwild
better than Opera 7, where the default sig is an advertisment for M2!

Yes, that was quite a shocker. No mention of it anywhere visible.

Quote:

However, the default signature is also attached to new personalities, where there's a fair chance of it being wrong - and if it is wrong, it's probably confusing too. [/b]

I agree about not making personal info the default, but don't get the personalities argument. I thought guests only had one personality anyway.

rismi · 14 Mar 2003, 05:15 PM

I wasn't aware that Fastmail did this before reading this thread (I have an Enhanced account) but I think it's pretty stupid.

Why on earth would anyone want their full name and email address at the bottom of each message they send? Sure, people do it, but what is the use?

Putting other things, like a telephone number or postal address, fine. But I don't need to see someone's name and email address in their signature if I've just recieved an email from them, do I? It's in the from field, and having it anywhere else is utterly pointless.

The only exception I would make to this would be if I was using an email account temporarily and I wanted people to reply to me at a different address. But then I wouldn't put that information in the .sig, where it might be ignored: I would put it on the first line of the email in capital letters...

**Gankaku** · 14 Mar 2003, 08:07 PM

The problem I see is if a new user signs up and is unfamiliar with the service. Then they need to send a type of anonymous message - they don't want the recipient to know it's them...they might even use a different From line. Then when they send the email, their tagline has their first and last name all right there in black and white. How embarrassing/upsetting...etc.

hadaso · 14 Mar 2003, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rismi
...
The only exception I would make to this would be if I was using an email account temporarily and I wanted people to reply to me at a different address. But then I wouldn't put that information in the .sig, where it might be ignored: I would put it on the first line of the email in capital letters...

With FastMail you can put it in the FromLine.

Actually RFC 822 defines three fields:

"From:" is the author of the email.
"Sender": is the person that physically sent it.
"Reply-to:" is where the reply, if any, should be sent (e.g., the author's secretary).

pcs · 15 Mar 2003, 06:25 AM

I’m a relatively new user of fastmail and I think its service and web interface are outstanding. Having said that though, one quibble I have is with the default signature on paying accounts. It seems a little counter intuitive to start a user off with a signature.

I understand that non paying users will be more limited in what they can expect. Paying users though, probably shouldn’t default to starting out with a signature (just my opinion).

esTester · 15 Mar 2003, 01:59 PM

Jeremy, I think you are right, many people like having a signature, except that is not the issue here. The issue is weather it should be on by default or not. The other aspect is the default signature itself. It not only exposes a persons first and last name, which many people do not want released for privacy reasons and their Fastmail.fm email address. The problem with using the Fastmail.fm email address is that many people use the Fromline feature of FM, thus the signature would be revealing another one of their email addresses, which could possibly be put on a spam list or even confuse the person on the other end, as many are not as computer and email literate as most of us here.

Having the signature is great, but having it on by default is not. It can cause more problems than it is worth. If someone knew about it and wanted it they could turn it on. Whereas, someone who doesn't know what it is would most likely not know how to turn it off and not bother checking the FAQ or anything else. Person #2 might not even realize it is sending the signature with their messages.

Signatures are a personal preference and FM should not activate them by default.

**JeffK** · 15 Mar 2003, 02:01 PM

Welcome back esTester. It's great to hear from you again.

Best wishes,

Jeff

14 Mar 2003, 06:23 AM	#20
hadaso The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Holon, Israel. Posts: 4,856	1. All the info in the initial signature is also in the initial FromLine. If the user is knowledgeable enough to change the default personality, it should be expected that the user is also smart enough to change the signature. 2. On the other hand, since all this info is in the FromLine, there is absolutely no need for that initial signature. On account setup the default should be no signature. 3. A wizard, or some screen that walks the new user through the most basic options would be very good, since all the available options fastmail has is quite overwhelming for a new user. 4. To avoid the problem of getting the wrong signature with a personality by mistake, it would be handy to have some variables that can go in the signature, and use the values from the personality, or from the FromLine. then something like: Code: %NAME% %FROM% would resolve to the name from the personality and the email address from the "From:" field (that might be entered using the # method). This way one default signature can work with many different personalities. (And finally for those of us who can never be satisfied:an extra variables field in every personality that holds <varname,string> pairs so we can really program our signatures ) P.S. Elvey, I remember the days when signature meant that typing "~A" I would get " Sincerely, Ofer Hadas." and typing "~a" I would get "bye, Ofer." ~a

14 Mar 2003, 04:56 AM	#17
flashbang Essential Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: US Posts: 262	I also agree. I think that displaying personal info should be the choice of the user. FB

14 Mar 2003, 05:15 PM	#25
rismi Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: London, UK Posts: 70	I wasn't aware that Fastmail did this before reading this thread (I have an Enhanced account) but I think it's pretty stupid. Why on earth would anyone want their full name and email address at the bottom of each message they send? Sure, people do it, but what is the use? Putting other things, like a telephone number or postal address, fine. But I don't need to see someone's name and email address in their signature if I've just recieved an email from them, do I? It's in the from field, and having it anywhere else is utterly pointless. The only exception I would make to this would be if I was using an email account temporarily and I wanted people to reply to me at a different address. But then I wouldn't put that information in the .sig, where it might be ignored: I would put it on the first line of the email in capital letters...

14 Mar 2003, 08:07 PM	#26
Gankaku Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 3,265	The problem I see is if a new user signs up and is unfamiliar with the service. Then they need to send a type of anonymous message - they don't want the recipient to know it's them...they might even use a different From line. Then when they send the email, their tagline has their first and last name all right there in black and white. How embarrassing/upsetting...etc.

15 Mar 2003, 06:25 AM	#28
pcs Essential Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 204	I’m a relatively new user of fastmail and I think its service and web interface are outstanding. Having said that though, one quibble I have is with the default signature on paying accounts. It seems a little counter intuitive to start a user off with a signature. I understand that non paying users will be more limited in what they can expect. Paying users though, probably shouldn’t default to starting out with a signature (just my opinion).

15 Mar 2003, 01:59 PM	#29
esTester Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 968	Jeremy, I think you are right, many people like having a signature, except that is not the issue here. The issue is weather it should be on by default or not. The other aspect is the default signature itself. It not only exposes a persons first and last name, which many people do not want released for privacy reasons and their Fastmail.fm email address. The problem with using the Fastmail.fm email address is that many people use the Fromline feature of FM, thus the signature would be revealing another one of their email addresses, which could possibly be put on a spam list or even confuse the person on the other end, as many are not as computer and email literate as most of us here. Having the signature is great, but having it on by default is not. It can cause more problems than it is worth. If someone knew about it and wanted it they could turn it on. Whereas, someone who doesn't know what it is would most likely not know how to turn it off and not bother checking the FAQ or anything else. Person #2 might not even realize it is sending the signature with their messages. Signatures are a personal preference and FM should not activate them by default.

15 Mar 2003, 02:01 PM	#30
JeffK Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Kingaroy, AU Posts: 3,179	Welcome back esTester. It's great to hear from you again. Best wishes, Jeff