| 1 |
On Mon, 23 May 2016 22:08:20 -0500 |
| 2 |
Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Jonathan Callen wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On 05/23/2016 12:39 AM, Dale wrote: |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> >>> -- |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> >> P. S. I'm not sure how this is going to be formatted. It looks odd |
| 10 |
> >> at the moment. :/ |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > The magic to getting things like this to format correctly is to |
| 13 |
> > remove the line that is exactly "-- " (dash-dash-space) and |
| 14 |
> > everything following it -- or to ensure that that line is quoted |
| 15 |
> > somehow. Most text email clients treat that string as a signature |
| 16 |
> > indicator, and assume that everything following it isn't very |
| 17 |
> > important, just boilerplate. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> My concern was whether it would show what was my text and what was the |
| 20 |
> original since they both looked the same. It didn't quote like it |
| 21 |
> normally would but it is fairly obvious as to who said what. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Not to me, since I have my client configured not to display |
| 24 |
signatures. All I say was the forwarded post, with none of your new |
| 25 |
text. If Johnathan hadn't pointed out what happened, I'd never have |
| 26 |
known there was any new text from you. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Just removing the trailing space from the "-- " line is enough to |
| 29 |
prevent automagic signature detection, and leaving the "--" makes it |
| 30 |
clear that it was originally a sig. |
Archives