Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 22, 2019, 10:31:26 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Tools of the trade  |  Topic: Guide for email signature format
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print
Author Topic: Guide for email signature format  (Read 2384 times)
Spartan 92458-37017-EB
Recruit

Posts: 5
Unit: GLR-IL-008

« on: July 06, 2016, 01:49:54 AM »

I've been quite busy using my personal email for CAP business with my cadets and communicating with Encampment staff to make sure I'm set and prepared for when the time arrives to ship out to Camp Lincoln. But all along I've seen and used several different formats on how to sign an email properly. I was wondering if there was an easier guide that I could follow to get the official/proper way to sign an email when conducting CAP business
Report to moderator   Logged
kcebnaes
Forum Regular

Posts: 115
Unit: GLR-OH-064

« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2016, 01:52:31 AM »

Hello friend, CAPR 10-1 will be your friend in this matter!  :)
Report to moderator   Logged
Maj Sean Beck
Ohio Wing
Director of Personnel
Group VI Commander
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,351
Unit: Worry

« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2016, 01:52:39 AM »

http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/branding_resource_guide/sample-signature-bloc/

I also like our wing's presentation: http://www.wawg.cap.gov/wing-staff/information-technology/how-to-implement-new-signature-block
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,766

« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2016, 03:57:01 AM »

From an IT perspective the text-only version is your friend.

That ridiculous graphic / link laden abomination gets munged horribly by many email systems,
not to mention in replies and forwards.
Report to moderator   Logged


Paul Creed III
Seasoned Member

Posts: 254
Unit: GLR-OH-254

« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2016, 12:04:26 PM »

From an IT perspective the text-only version is your friend.

That ridiculous graphic / link laden abomination gets munged horribly by many email systems,
not to mention in replies and forwards.

+1 Every .gov and .mil that I communicate with doesn't handle the graphic at all and, by using the text-format on my mobile devices along with in my regular email clients, the signature is consistent. Trying to get the graphic version working on some mobile platforms is unpleasant.
Report to moderator   Logged
Lt Col Paul Creed III, CAP
National Headquarters Cyber Curriculum Specialist
Great Lakes Region Cyber Programs Officer
Ohio Wing Group 3 Commander
Fubar
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 753

« Reply #5 on: July 06, 2016, 04:30:18 PM »

+1 Every .gov and .mil that I communicate with doesn't handle the graphic at all and, by using the text-format on my mobile devices along with in my regular email clients, the signature is consistent. Trying to get the graphic version working on some mobile platforms is unpleasant.

Good thing our PR folks considered our target audiences when coming up with our required email signatures. This is apparently one of the most important things in CAP, it's even covered during SUIs!
Report to moderator   Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,529

« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2016, 08:34:28 PM »


Good thing our PR folks considered our target audiences when coming up with our required email signatures. This is apparently one of the most important things in CAP, it's even covered during SUIs!

"Preferred" Signature Block

Doesn't say required.

http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/branding_resource_guide/sample-signature-bloc/

(For all you folks that like to read everything literally. ;) )


.
Report to moderator   Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP - FRO

sUAS MP - sUAS Instructor - sUAS Check Pilot
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,913

« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2016, 08:37:58 PM »


Good thing our PR folks considered our target audiences when coming up with our required email signatures. This is apparently one of the most important things in CAP, it's even covered during SUIs!

"Preferred" Signature Block

Doesn't say required.

http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/branding_resource_guide/sample-signature-bloc/

(For all you folks that like to read everything literally. ;) )


.

Open the regs, not some blurb on NHQ's website. It says "required". The "preferred" is the one they want you to use. Read all of the words.
Report to moderator   Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,680

« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2016, 03:31:28 PM »

Required? Yes. The worst signature block ever? Absolutely!

I still can't believe NHQ/PA came up with it. It doesn't meet any military or corporate guidelines, and it doesn't look professional. And because there are three of them (not including all those unauthorized variations), standardization and branding and defeated.
Report to moderator   Logged
kwe1009
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 915

« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2016, 10:44:36 PM »

Required? Yes. The worst signature block ever? Absolutely!

I still can't believe NHQ/PA came up with it. It doesn't meet any military or corporate guidelines, and it doesn't look professional. And because there are three of them (not including all those unauthorized variations), standardization and branding and defeated.

So I guess that means "mission accomplished" for NHQ!
Report to moderator   Logged
Storm Chaser
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,680

« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2016, 11:55:14 PM »

Required? Yes. The worst signature block ever? Absolutely!

I still can't believe NHQ/PA came up with it. It doesn't meet any military or corporate guidelines, and it doesn't look professional. And because there are three of them (not including all those unauthorized variations), standardization and branding and defeated.

So I guess that means "mission accomplished" for NHQ!

I guess that depends on what you mean by "mission accomplished". I'm sure whoever came up with this had good intentions. Obviously, it was approved by our leadership. But that doesn't mean it wasn't an ill attempt at establishing some standardization and branding that didn't really accomplish its intended goal. The signature block, especially the one with all the images, it's out of touch even for the corporate world. We wear a military style uniform, have military style grades and duty titles, and yet we couldn't stick with standard military signature blocks. Why?
Report to moderator   Logged
Holding Pattern
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,351
Unit: Worry

« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2016, 03:38:47 AM »

Required? Yes. The worst signature block ever? Absolutely!

I still can't believe NHQ/PA came up with it. It doesn't meet any military or corporate guidelines, and it doesn't look professional. And because there are three of them (not including all those unauthorized variations), standardization and branding and defeated.

So I guess that means "mission accomplished" for NHQ!

I guess that depends on what you mean by "mission accomplished". I'm sure whoever came up with this had good intentions. Obviously, it was approved by our leadership. But that doesn't mean it wasn't an ill attempt at establishing some standardization and branding that didn't really accomplish its intended goal. The signature block, especially the one with all the images, it's out of touch even for the corporate world. We wear a military style uniform, have military style grades and duty titles, and yet we couldn't stick with standard military signature blocks. Why?

AUX OFF
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Tools of the trade  |  Topic: Guide for email signature format
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 26 queries.