A comment on an email signature

I've added this signature to my outgoing emails at work

n="63686180107683"; n.split('').splice(0,7).map(function() {
   t=n%100; n=n/100; return parseInt(t);
}).reverse().map(function(v) {
   return String.fromCharCode(v+6*6);
}).join('');

and was pleasantly surprised to receive a fairly long and detailed analysis of what Joel Rosario had to say about it.

I wonder how many people have run and tried to understand your signature. I just did. It is devious, and evil.

* What you really want is a loop. Why splice the large string from 0 to 7? It unnecessarily misleads the reader into thinking you're doing a meaningful string operation.
* Why use map with an anonymous function that takes no parameter? This trips up the unwary reader into reading the function, and wondering what it is being applied to.
* The use of n % 100 and n=n/100 seems to show off javascript's perlish ability to treat strings as numbers.
* The above might also confuse the hapless reader. What happens when you cross a string with a number, hmmm?
* By this time, having nearly given up trying to understand what's going on, the reader is hit with reverse(), surprised by a map(), and presented with a function that expects a parameter that is clearly an integer. The arithmetic operations of +6*6 applied to an already mystical parameter v will be too much for any sane person to bear. By now your reader has already succumbed to his fear and fled for a coffee break.

Why lay such traps for the unwary? Why risk the equanimity, the morale, indeed the sanity of your esteemed colleagues? Why couldn't you just have signed your mail with console.log('chat.pw')?

- Joel Rosario.

Needless to say, some of my emails will randomly have console.log("chat.pw") in them ;)

Emails like this make my day; nay week!!