New Legislation Concerning Signatures

Wired · #1 03-22-2006, 05:12 PM

Is this forum not a democracy? We have the right to be informed before new legislation is passed.

I noticed that many members possess signatures that will break the sudden and new rules. The majority obviously doesn't care if the signatures aren't "uniform." Now it's time to prove it. Voice your opinion. Do you think the new rules are fair and needed or should everything stay as is?

used:) · #2 03-22-2006, 05:19 PM

If we had elections, they would be rigged. Besides, it's only signatures, not he biggest deal on the forums.

Daxter King · #3 03-22-2006, 05:49 PM

I'm with you wired! Although judging from older members talk old voting polls were rigged.

Facsimile · #4 03-22-2006, 08:08 PM

I like uniformity...

Havoc · #5 03-22-2006, 10:38 PM

I was never bothered by the signatures. It suits the board in a way I guess. I was kinda surprised at it when Alcar announced it, so yea.

***Alcar*** · #6 03-23-2006, 03:00 AM

Perhaps legislation was a bad choice of words.

The forums have always been described as a semi-democratic society, as the Administrators have always reserved the right to do anything they see fit. The democratic part of the forums is the priviledge we have given to you to challenge, suggest or complain about things.

However, these are the rules. I think they're pretty lenient. If we really wanted to put the focus on people's replies, we could disable signatures altogether.

Alcar...

T-nex · #7 03-23-2006, 03:05 AM

Or instead of disabling the signatures altogether, you could actually listen to what people say

I'm quite unsatisfied with these rules, because i really like the differen't form to signatures, and you could do so much more with them. But now they are probably all going to look alike... :-/

oddveteran93 · #8 03-23-2006, 03:32 AM

Well, this new legislation doesn't really affect me that much. I don't love sigs so much although they make every member unique (in most cases anyway). But if Alcar changes the rules about sigs we must obey all of his brutal comands! I'm just fooling around. :P

***Alcar*** · #9 03-23-2006, 04:47 AM

:

I'm quite unsatisfied with these rules, because i really like the differen't form to signatures, and you could do so much more with them. But now they are probably all going to look alike... :-/

The only difference in the new rules is the amount of space they occupy. They're not going to all look the same. It'll be like it originally was, only a bit less.

Alcar...

Wired · #10 03-23-2006, 11:40 AM

:

they make every member unique.

Precisely my point. This is about censoring our self-expression. Think about it, what does it hurt if one member's signature holds one too many lines of text or has two emoticons, breaking the "no more than one image" rule. If an image is so small, what does it hurt if there are two or three of them? They still don't take up as much room as an entire banner. Expections should be allowed for such people.

:

But if Alcar changes the rules about sigs we must obey all of his brutal comands! I'm just fooling around. :P

Fooling around or acting foolish? I suppose this is the overwhelming attitude of the majority here. Even if you disagree, you'd rather sit back, quietly obeying instead of protesting.

BTW, don't get me wrong. In no way am I challenging Peter's character. I like him very much, but I perhaps find some errors in his leadership.

AquaticAmbi · #11 03-23-2006, 02:35 PM

Hmm, like I said before, I think some of the signatures are a bit over the top in size, but I think most of them are okay. I don't really care either way as it doesn't affect me.

Adder · #12 03-26-2006, 02:55 AM

:

Is this forum not a democracy? We have the right to be informed before new legislation is passed.

This forum is not a democray. Think of it more as a "Republic"-style company. Mods are elected by the masses, so there is representation. But ultimitly, the people who own/pay for the site get to make the decissions. The rules are only there to stop people having one-line posts and 2 screens of signature. I feel the changes aren't drastic and will make a difference for the better.

:

This is about censoring our self-expression.

...no. This is about limiting the space your expression can take up so that other peoples' expressions can be seen. Your signature can still say whatever you want it to, as long as it isn't your life story... unless you can visualy put your life story on 400x150 pixles

***Alcar*** · #13 03-26-2006, 04:30 AM

Wired, call me Alcar. It's irritating when you call me by my real name, and it earns you less respect.

Alcar...

Splat · #14 03-26-2006, 08:00 AM

It's good to have rules confining the signatures, obviously if everyone had 12 lines of text and a huge image it'd take up a lot of bandwidth and slow the forums down a lot.
Alright, that was a slight exaggeration but you get my point.

But I thought the previous sig rules were fine.I never really gave most sigs more than a couple of glances when reading the forums, and that's the point. Sigs (and avatars) are a good way of identifying posts and members as you scroll down a page. Bright images were good there. Some might steal some attention but you can get used to overlooking them. Sort of a skill you develop just by being on forums. Downsizing them was a discision i didn't like as there was never much of an issue for me in the first place, and it means I have to take stuff out that i wouldn't want to.

Signatures give you a chance to briefly introduce youself, make a first impression. By making them smaller you're removing the chance to do that.

Biggy Bro Slig · #15 03-26-2006, 08:01 AM

:

This forum is not a democray. Think of it more as a "Republic"-style company. Mods are elected by the masses, so there is representation. But ultimitly, the people who own/pay for the site get to make the decissions. The rules are only there to stop people having one-line posts and 2 screens of signature. I feel the changes aren't drastic and will make a difference for the better.

I think of it as an Empire.
The evil Emperors: Admins.
The Advisors/military: Mods
Rebelling idiots: People who try and spam up the forum.
Slaves: The nice members who have small signatures AND obey the rules.

Adder · #16 03-26-2006, 01:00 PM

The problem with that modle, BBS, is that the Slaves can decide who the Emperors are.

T-nex · #17 03-26-2006, 01:51 PM

No they dont... Everyone couldn't just say that we don't want Alcar or one of the other mods to stop being mods/admins... Besides Abe babe and Alcar pays for the servers, so they are gonna stay wether we like it or not.
But my point is that this isnot democracy nor is it republican... It's just the Admin's word and thats it...

Wired · #18 03-26-2006, 03:48 PM

Fine, pass your stupid rule ALCAR, but there are lots of us who dislike your descision and attitude to leadership.

If you're going to be this sensitive over signatures I don't even want to think about how you'll be with more important descisions. This dissapoints me.

Godlesswanderer · #19 03-26-2006, 04:48 PM

Ooooo... an uprising. Power to the people!! And all that.

The new signature rules don't really bother me much, seeing as my signature follows the rules. And although I can't see why Alcar wants to change the rules, it's well within his rights as Admin.

used:) · #20 03-26-2006, 04:50 PM

I can just see Hobo throwing a bitch fit in Employee Lounge if he were here.

Cullen Heath · #21 03-26-2006, 06:59 PM

:

Fine, pass your stupid rule ALCAR, but there are lots of us who dislike your descision and attitude to leadership.

If you're going to be this sensitive over signatures I don't even want to think about how you'll be with more important descisions. This dissapoints me.

Chill out!

I've not yet heard these new rules. Are they in the Forums rules, or did everyone just hear about them?

EDIT: Okay, I saw them. I don't know about the one image thing, but I can live with it. Alcar, if that's what needs to happen for some reason, then I'm perfectly fine with it.

Adder · #22 03-26-2006, 11:19 PM

:

Fine... but there are lots of us who dislike your descision and attitude to leadership.

Going by this poll there are 5.

And 10 people voted in favour of the new rules. That's a 2:1 majority against, Wired. By democracy, the new rules win. If you want to keep democratic, you should accept that and move on.

------
T-Nex: Argh, I meant "The Advisors" or Mods. After some tenure time, there's normaly a "who do you want to be Mod" thread which adds a little democracy. Of course, ultimitly, the people PAYING for the site have veto.

Splat · #23 03-27-2006, 03:20 AM

Wired, please don't get angry. Alcar has basically been a fair and noble leader (or something) and usually he's not that bad. Every leader is gonna make decisions we don't like, be it forum admins or directors remaking books into films. (ah, my glorious analogies)

Actually with Alcar he's often fairer with the bigger things than the little things.

Just out of interes, how many people who voted change the rule actually had a problem with the signature rules and would have liked them changed before this nw rule was announced? And how many never really cared?

If you're voting change because you didn't like the old sig rules, fne.
If you're voting change because you don't want to vote stay then really it wasn't worth voting.

T-nex · #24 03-27-2006, 04:30 AM

I just say yay for my new n cute signature.... Although i think the rules were perfectly fine beofre... I just fail to see why it was a problem before... No one really complained about them... Well Alcar did, and i guess if he'd like something changed, it's gonna get change... I guess that's the benefit of paying for the site

Rich · #25 03-27-2006, 07:17 AM

Yeah everyone, chill out. What Alcar says goes at the end of the day and I for one totally support him on this, I'm sick of hideously huge sig banner things.

used:) · #26 03-27-2006, 01:05 PM

I really wouldn't have considered most of everyones' siggies that big. I admit I about blew a fuse when I saw Skillertume's siggy a while back. Ah well, life goes on.

oddveteran93 · #27 03-28-2006, 12:51 AM

:

Yeah everyone, chill out. What Alcar says goes at the end of the day and I for one totally support him on this, I'm sick of hideously huge sig banner things.

Yeah, and they're only signatures, signatures people. It's not like the bigger sig you have, the awesomer you are. They're just little pics. If you like the signature you have now, why not just re-scale it (I think that's what you call that process). How hard can it be?

Mac the Janitor · #28 03-29-2006, 07:51 AM

Jeez guys.

If this is what gets you angry, you may need to go outside; pick up a hobby or something. It's only an online forum, after all.

Rich · #29 03-29-2006, 07:56 AM

:

Jeez guys.

If this is what gets you angry, you may need to go outside; pick up a hobby or something. It's only an online forum, after all.

Quoted for truth.

I'm closing this since the decision has been made and is final. No matter how much you whinge, kick and scream, you'll not get your precious ego-pixels back.