NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9815776&postcount=17

A bit large.

To be quite honest, there are some even bigger, they do my head in.
(Especially when there's a two word reply and you then have to wade through a huge mass of 'signature' to get to the next post.)

Isn't there some way that it can be restricted for NS users, even though larger are used on other jolt forums?

Isn't there some way that it can be restricted for NS users, even though larger are used on other jolt forums?

I think they would have done that by now, if it was doable.

And why is it SOOO hard to use the scrollbar to scroll to the next post? I just don't get why it bothers some people SOOO much?

Thankfully, IMG tags aren't allowed. Some forums are just ridiculous. But long sigs are unnecessary, simple as that. I don't see why we should have to scroll, however simple it is.

And why is it SOOO hard to use the scrollbar to scroll to the next post? I just don't get why it bothers some people SOOO much?

Because, especially in a roleplay, lines are used to split posts and things are highlighted for various reasons.

So, if you are trying to read what is going on, you have to at least wade through THAT players title once, before you realise that it's not relavent and if ALL the players have huge long signatures, not only is it disruptive to the story, but it takes up far too much band width.

And why is it SOOO hard to use the scrollbar to scroll to the next post? I just don't get why it bothers some people SOOO much?

Because you know... there's a rule for the amount of lines you're supposed to have in a sig, and usually, you need to abide by it.

Was deleted anyways.

Because you know... there's a rule for the amount of lines you're supposed to have in a sig, and usually, you need to abide by it.

Was deleted anyways.
Didn't mean to be disrespectful. I know rules are rules. I'm just curious as to why people get so upset by long sigs. Maybe this was an innapropriate place to ask the question.

Sorry about that.

BTW, if you feel like elaborating, I'm still a bit curious. Also, would "Why do long sigs bother you?" be ok for a thread if I don't flame in it? I'd like to see some opinions.

Because, especially in a roleplay, lines are used to split posts and things are highlighted for various reasons.

So, if you are trying to read what is going on, you have to at least wade through THAT players title once, before you realise that it's not relavent and if ALL the players have huge long signatures, not only is it disruptive to the story, but it takes up far too much band width.

I had already given my opinion on the matter.

I had already given my opinion on the matter.
I respect your opinion. I just would like to see more than one persons opinion.

From the OSRS:

Signature Spam: Forum signatures give you space to include a few carefully selected links or quotes. Sigs are attached to every post, and must therefore conform to clutter-reducing rules. Maximum size should never exceed eight lines, including blank lines and quote lines. (A short quote takes up 5 lines - "quote", attribution line, two lines for the box, and one line for the quote). Large font sizes should be avoided and may be trimmed without warning. Posting forbidden links is not allowed. Jolt policy prohibits images in signatures as well, so don't try IMG tags.

And personally, I think long sigs are annoying, spammy, and really not needed.

From the OSRS:



And personally, I think long sigs are annoying, spammy, and really not needed.
See, to me, I think sigs are one of the cool things about forums. They really kinda let you into the world of the poster a bit. I also REALLY wish we could have avatars! *looks forlornely at the mods' pretty avatars*

Well, the avatars are Jolt's policy - you either have to work for them, or pay them.

See, to me, I think sigs are one of the cool things about forums. They really kinda let you into the world of the poster a bit. I also REALLY wish we could have avatars! *looks forlornely at the mods' pretty avatars*I personally get ticked off when over 60% of what I'm reading is signatures. But that's why I turn signatures off.

Yeah OK then, you have your signatures, it's in smaller writing so you know to ignore under the line.
So why put it in rainbow colours that clash against each other and do nothing but make me go aaaaarrrrrrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhhhh.......?
It doesn't make me want to read it, it makes me want to ignore everything about the poster including the post itself.

Ok, I really think these comments are verging on the unhelpful. Maybe we should start a discussion thread about sigs in General; as it is, the 'official policy' seems pretty clear.