|
Please note this is an archived topic, so it is locked and unable to be replied to. You may, however, start a new topic and refer to this topic with a link.
Page: 1 2
schlange - Posted - 11/18/2009: 13:23:37
Hi Folks,
As of today, we're no longer allowing signatures on forum posts. To be clear: you can write whatever you want in your posts, as long as it's within the rules... I just disabled the part of the system which allows you to save a signature and automatically add it to every post.
We've allowed signatures since the forums began several years ago, but the mods, myself, and most members we've asked agree that signatures simply crowd up the discussions and (sometimes) create conflict and unnecessary work for the mods. I figure the simplest solution is to just ditch the signatures altogether--so that's what we've done.
Feel free to lament the passing of the forum sig below.
_eric
Trashbanjo - Posted - 11/18/2009: 13:27:23
Oh well, no biggie,I will miss the Penguin.
N.E.banjo - Posted - 11/18/2009: 13:34:14
All deeper issues with this aside, I think it's great!
Some people think they need a veritable "MySpace" page below EVERY post.
A one-word response followed by 8 inches of "all-about-my-life", several times per page.
And as you say - it makes things so cluttered.
Dan
TonyS - Posted - 11/18/2009: 14:04:25
...Eric be da boss - no biggie...
JackJack - Posted - 11/18/2009: 14:10:27
Just a thought....
How about allowing signatures within a certain number of characters? Like 24 characters? Then members can put their name, or a web address if desired. Than it won't be so cluttered.
I never really used a signature except for the smiley, which I add at the end of my posts. Like this...
backtothefuture - Posted - 11/18/2009: 14:15:21
Any My-Space pages (as Dan mentions) can still be posted on the member's BHO Homepage, as far as I know.
This would also include small advertisements for products and websites sites that members might also have posted in their post signature.
Why should Eric give away free advertising space with every member's posts?
dpete210 - Posted - 11/18/2009: 14:15:23
This is no biggie for me because if I didn't like a particular signature, I just didn't read it. A possible solution would be be to limit the number of characters allowed in a signature to about 50 letters. Yes, the easy course is to just eliminate the signatures, and it could be viewed upon as though those who object to reading a signature they might not like have managed to complain loudly and often enough to force their wishes on everyone else.
Those who feel strongly about the signature they used will still be able to copy paste what they were using into their posts, so don't be surprised if that happens once in awhile 
With all the problems facing the world, it must feel good to have solved another one of them.
backtothefuture - Posted - 11/18/2009: 14:19:35
quote:
Originally posted by dpete210
......Those who feel strongly about the signature they used will still be able to copy paste what they were using into their posts, so don't be surprised if that happens once in awhile
Maybe so, but fyi....I manually inserted my usual George Formby gif into a post I made and it was deleted by a mod. I just wanted a clarification, which I finally got.
schlange - Posted - 11/18/2009: 15:12:47
What does that mean, 3fingers?
dcbanjo - Posted - 11/18/2009: 16:10:26
I kinda liked the signatures.Didn't realize they took up that much room.
xnavyguy - Posted - 11/18/2009: 16:13:43
I could get use to it. No problem for me.
jpiperson2002 - Posted - 11/19/2009: 03:39:00
If it eliminates the religious post scripts I'm all for it, those are just irritating and have nothing to do with the topic. Most of us use a pen name for our accounts and we can still type in our own name or pithy closing comment.
I'll miss the animated penguin.
John Piper
GerhardP - Posted - 11/19/2009: 03:53:48
Sorry to see the penguins go!
If sigs were limited to a few (let's say three) lines of text, automatically displayed in size 1 text and preceeded by a horizontal line they wouldn't clutter the page...
But I too hated the screenful of animated GIFs signatures, makes the threads hard to read. Also in many cases it was guesswork, where the post ended and the sig started.
Gerhard
" Most bullet holes in banjos are a result of poor aim"
(Fretless Josh Saw in BNL July '02)
Kenneth Logsdon - Posted - 11/19/2009: 08:57:46
Amen.. good deal.. The use of them to circumvent the rules was really out of hand...
Nosferatu - Posted - 11/19/2009: 11:57:25
The baby is nolonger in the tub...
Ronnie - Posted - 11/19/2009: 12:04:11
I can see an angry crowd of banjo players approaching with torches and pitchforks!! Members are already complaining to the moderators, who can't do a damned thing about it!! Several have threatened to cancel their membership and some union members will not re-up. Eric, I am not sure this decision was in our best interest.
Edited by - Ronnie on 11/19/2009 19:02:52
Nosferatu - Posted - 11/19/2009: 12:11:07
Will the "Non-argumentative religious topics" be the next to go, along with the gun topics?
Edited by - Nosferatu on 11/19/2009 12:16:13
shawn_lackey - Posted - 11/19/2009: 14:42:05
it's your "livingroom", but I really liked and miss them - it was a part of who we were in this secret society
no signature required ~ shawn
Koala_in_pjs - Posted - 11/20/2009: 02:01:30
Some of the signatures were quite big and others did make it hard to work out where the message ended and the signature began. While there were some that were amusing or informative.
I don't have a problem with them being gone or if they'd stayed
If they were to be brought back a character limit would probably be a good idea.
Kip
apherigo - Posted - 11/20/2009: 04:43:05
I like the sigs. Ads character to the BHO. I laughed every time I saw the penguins. I agee to limiting the size tho.
Aaron
TMarshall1 - Posted - 11/20/2009: 07:02:21
I was surprised at how many emails I got that said they missed my
"Have a gDGBD" closure. All good things must come to an end I suppose...
Dock Jekel - Posted - 11/22/2009: 09:15:04
There's pros and cons. The cons have been expressed pretty well. I don't think that they are necessary, myself.
jbanjoist - Posted - 11/22/2009: 11:47:39
copy and paste T. Copy and paste.
Eric has clarified you can write whatever you want as long as it is in the rules.
I'm a NECHVILLIAN!
You don't know until you KNOW!
Post unto others as you would have them post unto you.
MrNatch3L - Posted - 11/23/2009: 05:15:50
Well, I had links in mine that pointed to the BHO photos tutorial videos I put together (and need to update sometime for the new BHO interface). I've had a lot of feedback from members who found them thru my sig and found them useful. There is a sticky topic on the subject which will have to suffice I guess. BTW- for the most part I only used my sig on topics I originated, and then only in the first post. I wonder if that could be a future compromise?
All in all, not a really big deal I guess.
Tom Hanway - Posted - 11/25/2009: 04:55:32
quote:
Originally posted by Nosferatu
The baby is no longer in the tub...
quote:
Originally posted by Nosferatu
The baby is no longer in the tub...
“So what?” First, personally I don’t mind Eric’s change in the rules, and I’m trying to view this new wrinkle from more than one perspective. Okay, Nosferatu’s allusion to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” underscores the point that personal/professional details, with or without links, revealed in a signature (always ignorable), are overnight regarded as unimportant. Signatures are inessential detail and erasable; like it or not, it's a fait accompli. Peoples’ once-accepted signatures – what distinguishes them (as individuals) from others, is abandoned as unimportant trivia. For some, stripping signatures away may be tantamount to taking away professional honor, like stripping a proud soldier of his stripes and hard-fought badges. Oh, life is so unfair ... hahaha. Then again, implementing this new policy immediately puts everybody on the same pluralistic (if not exactly “democratic”) playing field, uniformly and even-handedly. It makes sense because it cuts out a lot of b.llsh.t, creates less workload for the mods and keeps focus on the content of the threads themselves. Voilà!Some posters have alluded to the fact that this new rule is simply part of the constitutive rules of the game, (the living room), so be it. If one wants to remain and be a voluntary participant in the BHO arena, one can choose to play by the rules or walk away. Be good or be gone. One can always say nothing, focus on the posts at hand, or, alternatively vote with one’s feet, quit posting and just leave the room. Has choice really been taken away? I think not, just a re-ordering of priorities for BHO. So what then? It’s a tempest in a teapot really, because everyone is still free to express themselves individually in their posts and put in germane links where they see fit, when they see fit. If a mod takes issue with it in a particular instance, it’s done on an ad hoc basis, presumably according to BHO policy. It’s easy to have this scenario happening than continual “issues” about length of posts and issues of fairness. Hey, is this post too long? LMAO Some people will be indifferent to this new development; others will lecture about how this changed policy is long overdue. Others will deplore the denial of this hitherto BHO privilege and accepted practice, lauding the efficacy of personal signatures, voluntarily made, in disseminating personal/professional information, including germane links to a person’s bona fide profession. Signatures with professional tags/links help students and beginners find professional advice without having to read through a lot of posts from people who lack the experience or industry kudos. That’s where this new policy may “throw the baby out with the bath water.” It’s the voluntary aspect of putting in signatures (or not) that has been stripped away here, and it’s this unilateral decision that may put off some conscientious posters, perhaps more than the questionable content of the signatures themselves, which folks could always simply ignore and scroll past. Losing the signatures is no big deal. I predict it will make communication easier between folks by eradicating perceived divisions (ego or rank) from the outset. As Eric mentioned, I think it will also make for more effective and judicious posting and monitoring. I think people – whether they admit it or not – are put off by accomplishments, professionals' industry status and may have negative knee-jerk reactions to others’ personally revealed kudos, so this could be a really positive development, eliminating all that noise. It's like this: you're not supposed to talk about yourself. Signatures do that, or did. It kind of takes the ego-burden and pressure off educators, who don’t have to feel that they must reveal themselves in full when someone glibly asks an oft-repeated or banal question that common sense or personal industry could answer. I think Eric made a very wise choice, upon reflection and consideration. Nice one, dude!
Edited by - Tom Hanway on 11/25/2009 05:55:55
Badger - Posted - 11/25/2009: 05:04:01
It is Eric's decision.
Sure there are things to be said either pro or anti signature. The thing I liked about them was it gave a quick yet crude measure of a posters ego, which is a good thing to have before deciding how seriously to take certain types of commentary.
minstrelmike - Posted - 11/25/2009: 06:36:53
I don't generally judge a post by the avatar or the sig line or anything except what is actually written.
Same way I don't judge a banjoist by the instrument he carries nor even by how well he plays it; I judge him mostly by how well he plays it with others.
============================================================
I've been on-line and helping other folks get online since before AOL and CompuServe (remember them?).
Most folks have no clue what sorts of social norms and mores they should follow and most bbs-style groups only become communities by discussing etiquette amongst themselves. It's just like real life communities. All the people who agree on the rules hang around together and the ones that don't leave and join other groups they do agree with. (Disclaimer: This has nothing to do with politics or religion)
The worldwide on-line community is slowly coming together over what a tasteful sig line is:
name contact info and/or link to personal/professional page,
optional non-irritating quote but only if you want to advertise you're a newbie or a flamer and generally frowned upon in the biz world.
However, by the time the idea catches on enough to become a norm normal enough for us to just say, "Do it because everyone else says so" to our children e-mail will be passe.
In the meantime, we can either have extra signature rules and try to enforce taste and camaraderie there, too, (in an area most believe is for our own personal expression) or we can just have one set of rules to rule them all.
(I'm still pushing for no off-topic discussions whatsoever).
Tom Hanway - Posted - 11/25/2009: 12:50:56
After reading Minstrel Mike's post, it occurs to me how eradicating signatures proscribes a small area of personal and professional expression for the sake of systematically and uniformly applied rules.
It's just applying the "principle of least effort" or "the path of least resistance" for the mods, minimizing Quixotic efforts and constant headaches for them and Eric, who works his ass off 24-7 keeping everything else functioning here. You can't begrudge him or the mods more downtime.
People, if their interest is piqued, are still free to click on a poster's name/avatar and dig deeper about them, find links, or google them, or whatever. Nobody is prevented from finding out more about someone else, and it's still purely voluntary, not forced information.
I think it's a fait accompli but good on you Minstrel Mike for telling it like it is.
I see the humor in this: When sundry on-line communities are beginning to achieve tacit consensus worldwide about what a tasteful and useful sig is, BHO makes them passé, ushering in a future sig-free-protocol for the Stepford-cyber-banjo-set and their dumbed-down-banjo-droning progeny. How dare they have a personal signature anyway? Who do they they think they are? Whom do they think they are kidding? Hahahahahahahaha - that was 8 beats to the bar. No worries.
};^D>
minstrelmike - Posted - 11/25/2009: 12:56:07
I agree whole-heartedly.
M
i
k
e
M
o
x
c
e
y
itinerant banjoist
banjo_brad - Posted - 11/25/2009: 17:45:49
What's that old chestnut about "dead horses"?
Tom Hanway - Posted - 11/25/2009: 18:12:42
quote:
Originally posted by banjo_brad
What's that old chestnut about "dead horses"?
Oh yeah: You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him *think*.
banjo_brad - Posted - 11/25/2009: 20:17:16
No, it had something to do with whips, I think.
bobdenver1961 - Posted - 11/25/2009: 20:26:00
Way to go Eric. I never did like seeing all the advertising for competing banjo forums!
bluemule_77 - Posted - 11/25/2009: 21:56:22
I think it's a wise move. Good work, Eric!
BM
snakeherd - Posted - 11/26/2009: 14:51:16
Maybe those signatures weren't that interesting to the rest of us once we had seen them once anyway.
But I miss the penguin too.
Tom Hanway - Posted - 11/26/2009: 15:05:44
quote:
Originally posted by banjo_brad
No, it had something to do with whips, I think.
It’s revealing - these clever references to "horses" and "whips." Please, don't stop ... delivering these floggering insights: I beg to speak that we've already gotten to the bottom of this disabled topic, but was the "disabling" consensual? Can there be no proxy vote? Does one vote with his feet? It doesn't matter cyber-masks. We know when we've been licked, laid out and had our hands tied. It’s time to hit the bricks. It's time to move on, onward and upward. For the record, I do not consent to any discussion of "whips" or "whipping" because of this sacrosanct BHO edict - if I may quote from the Rules: Pornography or "adult material" will not be allowed in any form. };^D>
Basic Strum - Posted - 11/29/2009: 15:00:43
How ironic that you would open a thread, Mr. Schlange, presumably to invite comment on your decision to stifle expression. Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to have simply taken your football, announced the end of signatures and been done with it?
Yes, this is your private enterprise, but if this is rightfully to be called a forum, then its members should be free to express themselves, while others are free to either react to or ignore those beliefs. Your moderators pay virtually no attention to postings that wander miles from the purpose of most threads, as long as they don't rankle anyone. I find the need to slog through the resulting unfocused drivel more annoying than many of the personal biases I see expressed in signatures, but I recognize them for what they are and play past them. In fact, they're easier to ignore when they're isolated at the ends of postings.
Indeed, the baby's gone with the bathwater.
schlange - Posted - 11/30/2009: 08:57:42
"Stifle expression?" Really?
I would contend that the baby is still happily in the tub.
Basic Strum - Posted - 11/30/2009: 10:55:23
quote:
Originally posted by schlange
"Stifle expression?" Really?
I would contend that the baby is still happily in the tub.
Really.
thkidd - Posted - 11/30/2009: 12:07:50
quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie
Members are already complaining to the moderators, who can't do a damned thing about it!!
So much for the rule about no profanity. And from a moderator too. I've seen several postings that used God's name as a profane statement, and none of those have been edited either.  I'm fine without the signatures. If they are reinstituted, I agree with the suggestions about a size limit being placed on them, and a horizontal line that separates them from the rest of the post, just so it's clear where the post ends and the signature begins.
JLB - Posted - 12/01/2009: 10:59:21
The good news: I can quit studing Latin.
The bad new: I'll miss the penguins too. Although they never did anything to improve my playing. 
-Jim
Jammer - Posted - 12/01/2009: 17:23:45
quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie
I can see an angry crowd of banjo players approaching with torches and pitchforks!! Members are already complaining to the moderators, who can't do a damned thing about it!! Several have threatened to cancel their membership and some union members will not re-up. Eric, I am not sure this decision was in our best interest.
I am strongly against it. After already being a mod on another site years ago in which the Admin(s) were more worried over FREE ADVERTISING because some members had the nerve to use their own sigs to run large BANNER ADS selling their own products (it was free advertising) I happen to feel we should be allowed some notes of personal ideas, or even links to our own FREE MUSIC. Nobody really buys MP3s these days it seems anyway, I would think it would not hurt anyone to allow personal free music links, or otherwise small tokens of expression that make up our personality. Banning SIG Links that are purely about $$$ could be done, and that way more of us might agree on this rule, if anyone cares what the other members feel. I used to not like the idea back when BHO allowed SIGS, but we had NO AVATARS. For the same reason we lost our SIGS our AVATARS could be pulled next, and I REALLY do not wish to see that happen here. Me
Edited by - Jammer on 12/01/2009 17:30:36
Jammer - Posted - 12/01/2009: 17:28:53
quote:
Originally posted by schlange
"Stifle expression?" Really?
I would contend that the baby is still happily in the tub.
YESMy Sig was an American Flag that said to Support American Workers. Now how dare a member since 2003 ever say such a nasty thing on this site. I am much less likely to bother surfing back here now. I strongly dislike this notion and I believe it is about $$- no free advertising, as some links could be used for that purpose in SIGS, in which case I feel it would be way more fair to say "no free advertising" and not allow such sigs. Terry Member since 2003. Maybe not in 2010.
Jammer - Posted - 12/01/2009: 17:36:56
quote:
Originally posted by Nosferatu
Will the "Non-argumentative religious topics" be the next to go, along with the gun topics?
Heck, normally I would not worry about gun issues being taking away here, but I just had my sig of THE AMERICAN FLAG BANNED! De End
Tackhead - Posted - 12/02/2009: 06:51:39
I subscribe to a classic bicycle list that *requires* real name, city and state (spelled out fully), and country. Don' do it and you're off the list. A bit draconian, but that's the rule. Reason? Just like here, there are a lot of subscribers in places other than the US. I *like* knowing where someone is located, e.g., Max Max is Sweden and others in the UK or Italy. Pretty cool. So, I won't miss the penguins or the religiosity, but I will miss the informative signatures of those who chose to include them.
~John
John Flynn
Tallahassee, Florida
USA
beeliner - Posted - 12/03/2009: 06:39:52
quote:
Originally posted by jpiperson2002
If it eliminates the religious post scripts I'm all for it, those are just irritating and have nothing to do with the topic. Most of us use a pen name for our accounts and we can still type in our own name or pithy closing comment.
I'll miss the animated penguin.
John Piper
No one has to read those "post scripts"if they don't like them!
beeliner - Posted - 12/03/2009: 06:44:32
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Hanway
After reading Minstrel Mike's post, it occurs to me how eradicating signatures proscribes a small area of personal and professional expression for the sake of systematically and uniformly applied rules.
It's just applying the "principle of least effort" or "the path of least resistance" for the mods, minimizing Quixotic efforts and constant headaches for them and Eric, who works his ass off 24-7 keeping everything else functioning here. You can't begrudge him or the mods more downtime.
People, if their interest is piqued, are still free to click on a poster's name/avatar and dig deeper about them, find links, or google them, or whatever. Nobody is prevented from finding out more about someone else, and it's still purely voluntary, not forced information.
I think it's a fait accompli but good on you Minstrel Mike for telling it like it is.
I see the humor in this: When sundry on-line communities are beginning to achieve tacit consensus worldwide about what a tasteful and useful sig is, BHO makes them passé, ushering in a future sig-free-protocol for the Stepford-cyber-banjo-set and their dumbed-down-banjo-droning progeny. How dare they have a personal signature anyway? Who do they they think they are? Whom do they think they are kidding? Hahahahahahahaha - that was 8 beats to the bar. No worries.
};^D>
Huh?
tanglefingers - Posted - 12/19/2009: 16:12:42
ok ok , enough of the technophobic whining and attacks NO ONE has stopped you adding a sig.
quote:
ERIC: To be clear: you can write whatever you want in your posts, as long as it's within the rules... I just disabled the part of the system which allows you to save a signature and automatically add it to every post.
... you will just have to do it manualy now... simply cut and paste it, or...dont  "You can Bomb the World to pieces, but you cant Bomb it into Peace" Micheal Franti
Edited by - tanglefingers on 12/19/2009 16:31:51
Page: 1 2
|
Feeds
