[OT] Re: Best practice for periodic key change?

[MFPA]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi


On Saturday 7 May 2011 at 8:50:45 PM, in
<mid:BANLkTi=Tg4Z7MkwTNZtwLHpjmHfFznwH3A at mail.gmail.com>, Jerome Baum
wrote:


> We weren't talking about fraud and deception. Only
> about lying -- rather, telling an untruth, which you
> may or may not be doing intentionally. But it is still
> an untruth if the form implies that the date is the
> dated the signature was placed -- rather than an
> instruction to make the amount available after that
> date.

Lying *is* deception. And your words "unless there is intended fraud"
appeared to me to be a reference to fraud.

As for the meaning of the date, whether it is supposed to mean the
date the signature was written or the date the instruction to pay
becomes effective or simply the date the cheque is issued to the payee
is unclear to me - and probably varies around the world. UK banks have
told me all three versions at various times. The one I heard
originally (and most often over the years) is the effective date of
the instruction to pay. YMMV.

Are we OT enough yet?


- --
Best regards

MFPA                    mailto:expires2011 at ymail.com

During an eruption - move away from the volcano - not towards it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQE7BAEBCgClBQJNxa3lnhSAAAAAAEAAVXNpZ25pbmdfa2V5X0lEIHNpZ25pbmdf
a2V5X0ZpbmdlcnByaW50IEAgIE1hc3Rlcl9rZXlfRmluZ2VycHJpbnQgQThBOTBC
OEVBRDBDNkU2OSBCQTIzOUI0NjgxRjFFRjk1MThFNkJENDY0NDdFQ0EwMyBAIEJB
MjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5p5tUD/23X
qbYxg2mUvMtSE9xjGyn4ZybZI+cJstg/392D9Aqs8HQeIS9V7OQ34UHXPVZRngrS
LKAS2gLJe3Zh4nBsuQfe4UhEzg4MNiPs9D8d7YQJ9gY9cecU7xyc48gp3pRyRGVb
02Acup6iPjqmCBbOd+Vcwq2h8l62uf6bomFGb3if
=7P1o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----