Do you sign your name on email even though your signature is the very next line?

February 1, 2012 9:54 PM

How do you sign your name in e-mails when you already have a signature? Do you repeat your name?

Excuse how silly this question is, but it's been bothering me for a while. What is the proper signature etiquette when your e-mail already has a signature? Do you repeat your name? Every time?

A)

Sincerely,
Bob Smith

--
Bob Smith
Superhero
555-555-212

B)

Sincerely,

--
Bob Smith
Superhero
555-555-212


Funny, now that I've written this out, I'm nearly certain the answer is A. For some reason I've been doing B for a long time; it just always seemed weird to repeat my name twice in a row each time. B is totally crazy, right?

posted by User7 to Computers & Internet (26 answers total)

Nah, I do B too.
posted by Wantok at 9:56 PM on February 1, 2012

I sign my first name if it's to someone outside the org, and just my first initial (and not always that) to colleagues inside - but my sig doesn't show for inside-org email.
posted by rtha at 9:57 PM on February 1, 2012

I do B) -- no separate signature.
posted by sweetkid at 9:58 PM on February 1, 2012

If I want to sign with my first name only, but still include the whole signature, I do it like this:

Best regards,
Grouse
--
Grouse Lastname, PhD
Grouser Extraordinaire
555-555-1212

If I don't, then I do it like this:

Best regards,
--
Grouse Lastname, PhD
Grouser Extraordinaire
555-555-1212

For people I'm pretty familiar with, I'll just use my first name, or just first initial, without the rest of the signature. I don't use an empty line before the --.

Hey, we have the same phone number, crazy!
posted by grouse at 9:59 PM on February 1, 2012

The whole "--" thing designating the signature is rather '90s.

It's "-- ", actually.
posted by grouse at 10:01 PM on February 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

No, B makes sense. If anything is "crazy," it's A. I say: make a decision. Decide whether you want a standardized signature with contact info, or if you want to manually write out your signature (perhaps in different ways) each time you send an email. Either one is fine. Doing both is redundant.
posted by John Cohen at 10:01 PM on February 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

I do what grouse does - my first name or initial to be informal, official sig below.
posted by Occula at 10:09 PM on February 1, 2012

I always do what grouse's first example was -

Best,
vegartanipla

--
vegartanipla lastname
blahblahblah
posted by vegartanipla at 10:10 PM on February 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Best answer: A. Think of it this way -- if you had business letterhead, or personalized stationery, you'd still sign your name even though your "name" was already printed or embossed on the paper, right? Your sig block is the equivalent of embossed/printed stationery.
posted by The Wrong Kind of Cheese at 10:14 PM on February 1, 2012 [12 favorites]

Response by poster: @TheWrongKindOfCheese: That's what finally dawned on me and why I thought A was correct when writing out this question.

To clarify, my question is mostly about formal contexts, like job applications - hence the over analysis.

Another thing that bothers me about choice (B) is that if I get a long reply, and then want to reply to that, it looks weird, because there's a bunch of quotes before my name shows up:

Dear Todd,

Thanks for getting back to me. I'll call you tomorrow.

Best,

>>Hi Bob,
>>
>>Blah Blah
>>Blah Blah
>>
>>From,
>>Todd
>>>>
>>>>Dear Todd,
>>>>Blah
>>>>Best,
>>>>--
>>>>Bob Smith

--
Bob Smith
Superhero
posted by User7 at 10:25 PM on February 1, 2012

Response by poster: Plus, in response to the comments above about the proper usage of the signature indicator "-- ", I also worry about how I believe some e-mail programs auto-hide or strip repetitive signatures. So then it might look like I'm signing with no name anywhere, unless they expand it.

I'm not sure if that actually happens. I'm just vaguely aware that the "-- " is supposed to let computers automatically find the signature.
posted by User7 at 10:28 PM on February 1, 2012

Well, there's your problem, User7. You shouldn't be top-posting.
posted by cardioid at 10:36 PM on February 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

my preference has always been for option c:

xoxo,
lia

--
herper of derps
[phone]

i think it's weird and redundant to put your name and/or email address in a signature—i mean, i got an email from you, so i obviously already know who you are and have your email address. save your signature for your job title, various ways to reach you, and if you're feeling particularly brave or silly, a maudlin quote i will totally judge you for.
posted by lia at 10:41 PM on February 1, 2012

Sincerely,
BS

--
Bob Smith
Superhero
555-555-212
posted by unknowncommand at 10:52 PM on February 1, 2012

Best answer: Hm, I do A. My reasoning is much like The Wrong Kind of Cheese. Also, doing so lets me sign my actual name really informally. This matters because as a professor, I know a lot of people don't know what to call me; I would rather they just call me by my first name so I like to sight it that way. But with that info there my contact details are there, so anyone who needs to know Who I Am can see that, too. So it goes:

cheers,
forza

---
Dr Forza MyLastname
BlahBlah University
url of webpage
--
posted by forza at 10:56 PM on February 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

Response by poster: Cardioid, for a second you had me convinced that I was doing something fundamentally wrong, as I had never even considered top vs bottom posting, but this Wikipedia text makes me feel confident top-posting is the way to go:

"Users of mobile devices, like Smartphones , are encouraged to use top-posting because the devices may only download the beginning of a message for viewing. The rest of the message is only retrieved when needed, which takes additional download time. Putting the relevant content at the beginning of the message requires less bandwidth, less time, and less scrolling for the Blackberry user. Top-posting is a natural consequence of the behavior of the "reply" function in many current e-mail readers, such as Microsoft Outlook, Gmail, and others. By default, these programs insert into the reply message a copy of the original message (without headers and often without any extra indentation or quotation markers), and position the editing cursor above it. Moreover, a bug present on most flavours of Microsoft Outlook caused the quotation markers to be lost when replying in plain text to a message that was originally sent in HTML/RTF. For these and possibly other reasons, many users seem to accept top-posting as the "standard" reply style. Partially because of Microsoft's influence, top-posting is very common on mailing lists and in personal e-mail. Top-posting has always been the standard format for forwarding a message to a third party, in which case the comments at the top (if any) are a "cover note" for the recipient."

Anyways, the lack of consensus here at least make me feel relieved that it's basically all up for grabs and I'm not committing any big faux pas one way or the other. Thanks all!
posted by User7 at 10:58 PM on February 1, 2012

I sign my first name above my signature to be informal. Also, all the email programs I've ever used at work stick the signature above the previous messages, like below, so it makes sense even in a reply.

Dear Todd,

Thanks for getting back to me. I'll call you tomorrow.

Best,
Bob

Bob Smith
Herper of Derps
867-5309

>>Hi Bob,
>>
>>Blah Blah
>>Blah Blah
>>
>>From,
>>Todd
>>>>
>>>>Dear Todd,
>>>>Blah
>>>>Best,
>>>>--
>>>>Bob Smith
posted by winna at 11:05 PM on February 1, 2012

Best answer: Use B. Top posting is the way to go but there's a setting on your sig setup that means you put it before the reply quote rather than after.
posted by mleigh at 11:05 PM on February 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

I do B, but I have no "--" or other marker between my email and my signature.

So it's always just:

Regards,

Xany
Person of Utmost Importance
123-456-7890

posted by Xany at 2:31 AM on February 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

I do A and actually get irrationally annoyed when I see B. I always find myself thinking "really? too busy and important to type your name?"
posted by charmcityblues at 4:13 AM on February 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

I do A as well, for the same reasons already described above by others.
posted by pemberkins at 5:10 AM on February 2, 2012

I do (C).

Thanks,

Jim

James Wilson
Oncologist
555-555-5555

I would never do the full name (with Wilson) twice. If I'm replying in a chain of emails in which I've already participated, I don't include my signature (it doesn't go automatically on my Outlook settings if I am replying to an email). I might or might not include a "Jim" or "James," depending on how formal I am being and who I am corresponding with. But in general I prefer (C) because I want to encourage people to call me Jim and not Dr. Wilson.
posted by J. Wilson at 6:10 AM on February 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

rtha: "I sign my first name if it's to someone outside the org, and just my first initial (and not always that) to colleagues inside - but my sig doesn't show for inside-org email."

Seconded.

I'm

David

--
David Lastname

to people outside the company and 'D' to everyone inside.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:13 AM on February 2, 2012

I do B, but there's no --- after the message and before the signature. I send the same thing on every message. My name is already there, so there's no reason to put it twice.
It's just:

Thank you!

aabbbiee lastname
Email
Title, Office
Organization
Address
Phone & fax
posted by aabbbiee at 6:34 AM on February 2, 2012

I do A systematically. More personal and less lazy. I also find B doesn't read well.
posted by rom1 at 7:18 AM on February 2, 2012

I do nothing. My name is at the top of the message, in the "From:" header. Salutations, signatures, and sig blocks are all wastes of space.
posted by nicwolff at 9:09 PM on February 2, 2012