topic Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images in Community Site Feedback

Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Be3G — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:39:18 GMT

Over recent months I think there's been an increasing proliferation of image-based signatures on this forum, mainly of three different varieties: images that display simple text, fancy auto-generated graphics (gaming tags/stats etc.), and images which contain logos/photos. These are all allowed under the current forum rules, provided they're of the correct size of course, but... I'm wondering if we should have them at all any more. I have two reasons for this:

SMF, or at least this installation of it, adds quite a bit of padding to signature images thus making such signatures rather 'tall' - to the point that sometimes they seem to dwarf the actual post content.

More importantly, I find they break the flow of things when reading a thread from its thread page (as opposed to 'unread posts' and any other similar tools). The text of signatures on these forums is by default small and grey, which makes them nice and unobtrusive when scanning/reading down a whole thread... until you hit a big bright image which grabs your attention away from the actual post content.

Admittedly, in the second case you get used to it after a while (that is to say, after seeing an image sig enough times I stop taking much notice of it), but when a new one comes along I find it's always fighting against the actual thread's content for my attention which is quite annoying. And, ultimately, as I see it, signature images don't really do much more than simple text could anyway - identification is a moot point because that's what avatars are for.
I know this might all seem hypocritical (seeing as I and all the other mods at the time agreed to allowing sig images), but considering the above I'd like to propose that all signature images are banned, with the possible exception of those that seek to emulate simple text if that concession must be awarded (I'd personally just like to see them all go). Perhaps I'll be in a bit of a minority here as I gather that most people use the 'unread posts' facility where having the flow of the thread being broken up won't be an issue, but still, is there anyone who thinks along the same lines as me?

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Lurker — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:41:05 GMT

Thomas, if you prefer not to see them, you can turn them off you know...

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

scootie — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:55:20 GMT

i dont mind sigs being over the allowed size limits as long as they have some info in them that is of intrest to the comunity

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Lurker — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:57:39 GMT

Whether its of interest or not is purely down to the individual reading it though, which I why I firmly believe we need to have sensible limits.
I also accept that some people may prefer to not see them at all, and the option is there within each persons profile to turn sigs off if they choose.
I think we have a good balance at the minute.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Be3G — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:08:20 GMT

Quote from: James_G
Thomas, if you prefer not to see them, you can turn them off you know...

You had me all excited (and feeling stupid) then until I realised you were talking about the setting that disables signatures entirely. That's not what I want; I like reading people's signatures - sometimes they contain very interesting or funny quips. It's just signature images that I dislike.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

scootie — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:50:36 GMT

i think i know which image sig has prompted this thread from you and i too when seeing it saw very little point in it

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

jelv — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:48:10 GMT

Quote from: Be3G
I like reading people's signatures - sometimes they contain very interesting or funny quips.

I've spotted just such an example on another forum:

Quote
Some people are like Slinkies; not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

dvorak — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:21:11 GMT

That is a good one

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

pierre_pierre — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:56:12 GMT

and that from a man with a Pic in his sig. (like me)

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

community — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:51:03 GMT

On the question of signatures, I would like to know why a little foreign language is not allowed in one's input.
I was ticked off for writing a few words of french recently, which I know is outside the rules of PN but why?
I welcome the fact that one of us has some russian with his avatar and this is accepted (as it shoud be)
cheers
Eddie

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

jelv — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:50:16 GMT

Quote from: community
I welcome the fact that one of us has some russian with his avatar and this is accepted (as it shoud be)

I find it odd that an ex-moderator (and one of the best we've ever had to boot) is pushing the limits in this way.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

scootie — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:29:17 GMT

yeah goolge translated that awhile ago to see what it said. i did add to mine the following i am rich in russian but didnt want to be put on the naughty chair so took it off

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Be3G — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:05:29 GMT

Ok, some thoughts:

Please don't talk about me in this quasi-behind-my-back manner, particularly in my own thread which I'm likely to see anyway - it's just weird. We're all people (with the possible exception of asbo), so let's address each other as such.

I have no intention of 'pushing the limits' and I do not see myself as doing so - the rules only talk about the language of posts, not anything else. My interpretation of the rules would lead me to have no qualms in putting something foreign in my signature, for example.

Furthermore, I think the spirit of the rule is being missed. Its intention was just to stop people writing a whole post in a foreign language (like Polish in non-Polish areas of the forum), or to stop people chatting away to themselves in a language few other people could understand. It is not supposed to inhibit all use of foreign languages on the forum; for example, I once had a three-way discussion with a couple of members (community might even have been one of them) about Russian in General Chit-Chat, including saying a few words in the language, and there was nothing wrong with that. (Which is to say, none of the three of us felt we were doing anything wrong - if we had, we presumably wouldn't have done it - and none of us were told off as far as I'm aware.)

Which brings me on to saying that I'm rather disappointed if a moderator did tell community off for having a foreign language signature. I came across such a signature in German a little while ago; it was a joke about computers but my now-meagre knowledge of the language allowed me to understand it and I was glad that person (can't remember who it was) had used such a signature as it was funny. It is my opinion that any moderator who tries to stifle such signatures is both missing the spirit of the forum language rule and flatly misusing it.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

James — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:07:12 GMT

Quote
I have no intention of 'pushing the limits' and I do not see myself as doing so - the rules only talk about the language of posts, not anything else. My interpretation of the rules would lead me to have no qualms in putting something foreign in my signature, for example.

They're referring to James pal.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Be3G — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:27:40 GMT

Come again, Jameseh? James doesn't have any Russian anywhere on his forum personage.
Also, I've received a PM which has clarified a couple of things - namely, that community's qualm concerns a post written in French, not a signature. Which rather changes the, shall we say, 'landscape' of the whole discussion.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Lurker — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:30:05 GMT

Quote from: Jameseh

They're referring to James pal.

Me?
Who is? Why?

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

mal0z — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:30:18 GMT

I see absolutely no reason why a few words of another language should not appear here - it's a perfectly normal form of writing, you see it in literature all the time. be a Latin, Greek, French phrase etc..
que ce soit

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Oldjim — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:49:45 GMT

Jim wonders whether to add this to his sig

Quote
Nil desperandum carburundum illegitami

but I would probably be reported for bypassing the swear filter

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

James — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:54:00 GMT

Bleh. I thought they were on about the jpeg that used to be your signature.
I'll go back to my little hole.

Re: Controversial suggestion: ban most/all sig images

Lurker — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:57:27 GMT

I'll let you off, its your birthday...