Jump to content




New signature requirements? What?


107 replies to this topic

#1 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:19 PM

So, I was trying to add a program to my signature, when I found, to my dismay:

Quote

Your signature may contain:
  • Up to 0 images
  • Images up to 0 x 0 pixels
  • Up to 3 URLs
  • Up to 3 lines
What?
3 lines? The signature guidelines in the stickies allow for 4 lines (plus 1 leniency line).
0 images? That just doesn't make sense.
3 URLs? Just what purpose does that achieve????

Someone please tell me this will be reverted...

#2 theoriginalbit

    Semi-Professional ComputerCrafter

  • Moderators
  • 7,332 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:21 PM

View PostRunasSudo, on 22 January 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

So, I was trying to add a program to my signature, when I found, to my dismay:

Quote

Your signature may contain:
  • Up to 0 images
  • Images up to 0 x 0 pixels
  • Up to 3 URLs
  • Up to 3 lines
What?
3 lines? The signature guidelines in the stickies allow for 4 lines (plus 1 leniency line).
0 images? That just doesn't make sense.
3 URLs? Just what purpose does that achieve????

Someone please tell me this will be reverted...
Well thats different from last time I saw it... o.O

#3 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:26 PM

View PostTheOriginalBIT, on 22 January 2013 - 11:21 PM, said:

Well thats different from last time I saw it... o.O
Same here! But it's there...
Posted Image
Trying to add PNGNFP to the list:
Posted Image
This better be an accident/mistake/admin was drunk and screwing around with settings.

#4 theoriginalbit

    Semi-Professional ComputerCrafter

  • Moderators
  • 7,332 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:31 PM

View PostRunasSudo, on 22 January 2013 - 11:26 PM, said:

This better be an accident/mistake/admin was drunk and screwing around with settings.
How long ago u do that? coz about 4 hours ago I changed mine...

#5 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:32 PM

View PostTheOriginalBIT, on 22 January 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

View PostRunasSudo, on 22 January 2013 - 11:26 PM, said:

This better be an accident/mistake/admin was drunk and screwing around with settings.
How long ago u do that? coz about 4 hours ago I changed mine...
Just then. I saved a copy to my hard disk at... 8:56 PM (ACDT).

#6 theoriginalbit

    Semi-Professional ComputerCrafter

  • Moderators
  • 7,332 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:34 PM

View PostRunasSudo, on 22 January 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

Just then. I saved a copy to my hard disk at... 8:56 PM (ACDT).
Odd... I'd try it, but don't wanna risk it :P

#7 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:42 PM

View PostTheOriginalBIT, on 22 January 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

View PostRunasSudo, on 22 January 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

Just then. I saved a copy to my hard disk at... 8:56 PM (ACDT).
Odd... I'd try it, but don't wanna risk it :P
It doesn't change anything so long as you don't try and save your signature. My signature still has an image (GASP!). And 4 URLs (DOUBLE GASP!) It just won't let you change the signature unless it's "valid".

#8 theoriginalbit

    Semi-Professional ComputerCrafter

  • Moderators
  • 7,332 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:54 PM

yeh can't change it now... :(

#9 zekesonxx

  • Signature Abuser
  • 263 posts
  • LocationWhere you aren't

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:36 AM

This needs to be answered.

#10 Dlcruz129

    What's a Lua?

  • Members
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:52 PM

View Postzekesonxx, on 23 January 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

This needs to be answered.

Ditto. I personally believe signature requirements are lame. If a signature is unreasonably long, an admin can easily change it or warn the user.

#11 theoriginalbit

    Semi-Professional ComputerCrafter

  • Moderators
  • 7,332 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 23 January 2013 - 12:53 PM

View PostDlcruz129, on 23 January 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

View Postzekesonxx, on 23 January 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

This needs to be answered.
Ditto. I personally believe signature requirements are lame. If a signature is unreasonably long, an admin can easily change it or warn the user.
I agree, for example I don't like the massive ones, like "Ender OS" and the similar...

#12 Cranium

    Ninja Scripter

  • Moderators
  • 4,031 posts
  • LocationLincoln, Nebraska

Posted 23 January 2013 - 02:33 PM

I believe this is in an attempt to quell some spam. Not sure, but just a guess.

#13 Lyqyd

    Lua Liquidator

  • Moderators
  • 8,464 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 02:47 PM

These seem like quite reasonable signature guidelines to me.

#14 Dlcruz129

    What's a Lua?

  • Members
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 02:47 PM

View PostCranium, on 23 January 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

I believe this is in an attempt to quell some spam. Not sure, but just a guess.

o_O Since when were you Mod? Congrats!

#15 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:14 PM

View PostCranium, on 23 January 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

I believe this is in an attempt to quell some spam. Not sure, but just a guess.

View PostLyqyd, on 23 January 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

These seem like quite reasonable signature guidelines to me.
In my opinion, they are unreasonable and contradictory. The signature guidelines sticky in General still has the "4+1 lines" guideline.
0 images is pointless. 5-ish? images with a maximum size would make far more sense.
The 3 URLs rule is just 110% completely stupid. How on earth does limiting the number of URLs in your signature help to combat spam???

In any way, how many "spam" signatures have you ever seen? Even counting the ones that infringe on the rules (but aren't spam), I've only seen 2 or 3.

OFF TOPIC: Congratulations, Cranium!

#16 Lyqyd

    Lua Liquidator

  • Moderators
  • 8,464 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:18 PM

There, I updated it for accuracy! :)

#17 Cranium

    Ninja Scripter

  • Moderators
  • 4,031 posts
  • LocationLincoln, Nebraska

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:18 PM

View PostRunasSudo, on 23 January 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

In my opinion, they are unreasonable and contradictory. The signature guidelines sticky in General still has the "4+1 lines" guideline.
0 images is pointless. 5-ish? images with a maximum size would make far more sense.
The 3 URLs rule is just 110% completely stupid. How on earth does limiting the number of URLs in your signature help to combat spam???

In any way, how many "spam" signatures have you ever seen? Even counting the ones that infringe on the rules (but aren't spam), I've only seen 2 or 3.

OFF TOPIC: Congratulations, Cranium!
Well, I know that dan200 has added some new methods to prevent spam today, such as having to approve the first 3 posts for new users. This may be one of those changes.

#18 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:28 PM

View PostCranium, on 23 January 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

Well, I know that dan200 has added some new methods to prevent spam today, such as having to approve the first 3 posts for new users. This may be one of those changes.
Members on the forum with the most posts (first page):
Cranium (1,928) - Signature Infringes
TheOriginalBIT (1,471) - Signature Infringes
MysticT (1,451) - Signature Infringes
PixelToast (1,282) - Signature Infringes
Orwell (809) - Signature Infringes
BigSHinyToys (806) - Signature Infringes
ComputerCraftFan11 (757) - Signature Infringes
Sammich Lord (701) - Signature Infringes
Kingdaro (626) - Signature Infringes
Dlcruz129 (618) - Signature Infringes

That is way too high a percentage (50%) to be reasonable. If you're going to ban something that 50% of the most respected people of the forum participate in...

#19 dissy

  • Members
  • 181 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:29 PM

View PostRunasSudo, on 23 January 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

In any way, how many "spam" signatures have you ever seen? Even counting the ones that infringe on the rules (but aren't spam), I've only seen 2 or 3.

Depends how you define spam ;}

By the "uggboots" comparison, yes I agree I have never seen a spammer with a signature at all.

But by some peoples definition (mine included) 75-90% of the forum regulars have spammy signatures. You can't even find a topic post without it (unless there's only one post by someone that just signed up to ask a question ;P )
A signature used to be just that, your name and/or nick, and possibly a piece of contact info. One-two lines of text.

While I wouldn't want to impose such a rule on others simply to not offend me, when I can disable signatures or just scroll past them, all other things being equal I too would prefer a zero image policy.

The images + urls get to a point where unless you write out 3+ paragraphs of text in a post, over 3/4ths of the topic page is nothing but signature spam with less than a quarter being content.

I've just gotten used to mentally ignoring it, and it's so wide spread (on the whole internet, not just here) that it's obvious to me I'm in the minority opinion there ;}

#20 RunasSudo-AWOLindefinitely

  • Signature Abuser
  • 249 posts
  • Location/dev/earth1aus5

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:32 PM

View Postdissy, on 23 January 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

But by some peoples definition (mine included) 75-90% of the forum regulars have spammy signatures.
Tell me which signatures in this thread are "spammy" under your definition.

View Postdissy, on 23 January 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

A signature used to be just that, your name and/or nick, and possibly a piece of contact info. One-two lines of text.
Yes... Except we have a profile page for that. This is a forum, not usenet...





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users