77 replies to this topic

[IceMetalPunk]

I don't know if this is the right place to put this (or if there's even a place to put this on the GMC), but I hope the mods will be nice enough to at least keep this open long enough for me to get a decent answer to the question.

Those who know me around here(and pretty much anywhere online) know that I always manually sign my posts/comments with "-IMP ". That's a signature that has a story behind it, but the point is that I sign my posts and have done so for about 5 years.

Now all of a sudden, people on other sites are complaining to me about it. Not just asking about it, but actively complaining. Their logic is that "we can see your name right next to your posts, so it's stupid and annoying for you to sign them". One person just went so far as to call it "spammy self-promotion".

Now, I sign my posts not for identification purposes, nor for promotion, but just because I think it's nice to take an extra 1 or 2 seconds to personalize what I write.

So I ask you: just because a signature is "unnecessary", does that really make it annoying or make it something I should feel pressured to stop doing?

Just FYI: my response has usually been "Why do you sign a snail-mail letter when your name is in the return address?" No one's answered this yet, but I've had at least 3 people on my case about this, and it gets old and frustrating fairly quickly, so I thought I'd ask around here.

-IMP

[Dangerous_Dave]

I can see how it could get annoying when people are quoting your posts (or part posts), having to remove it constantly.

I can say I've always considered it strange to do it, but I've never found it to be a problem.

[IceMetalPunk]

Having to remove it? Why not just leave it in?

Anyway, the complaints are coming from people on Gizmodo, which doesn't allow quoting anyway, so their complaints are just about reading/seeing it.

-IMP

[Nocturne]

Personally I find it annoying! Rationally I can't explain WHY it annoys me, but it just does... and this can't be compared to snail mail as it's NOT a letter, it's a post, and often no more than just a few line. Anyway, I wouldn't criticise you for it and I think it's just another form of self-expression which you are more than free to use!

[Desert Dog]

Do you sign yourself when your IM-ing? I don't really mind you signing yourself, but sometimes a post just don't need it.

Oh. And signature. Use your forum signature.

[IceMetalPunk]

No, because then I'd be signing something going back-and-forth in real time. It would get overwhelming. But something like a forum post is meant to be posted, then left there for others to read later on, and it's not quite as back-and-forth and certainly not real-time.

I could use my forum signature, but to me it seems like that wouldn't change the aesthetic at all (so people who are annoyed by it would still be anyway), but letting the forum auto-add it is kind of lazy and removes the sense of personalization from the...well, personalization. Taking an extra second to add something instead of just relying on the computer to do it just seems more personal to me. And the only difference in how it looks to everyone else is that it would appear below a line instead of above it.

So unless it's just the idea of me actually wanting to do something most people rely on the computer for that's annoying, I don't see how that would help. And if that's the problem...well, I'd hope that's not the case, because it would mean people really are becoming more and more sensitive.

@Nocturne: I'm sorry to hear that .Although I hope you understand the letter analogy still holds. If you write a snail mail letter that's only a few lines, most people would still sign it.

-IMP

[YellowAfterlife]

"Why do you sign a snail-mail letter when your name is in the return address?"

Because author of letter may differ from person signed in the return address (i.e. return address mentions adult member from the same family)

Looking far, far backwards [at early times of internet, when 'forum' systems were limited to a couple of scripts, and thus did not have signature support], people were signing their posts manually with their occupation, and name [if that did differ from nickname] - i.e. 'Steve Rodgers, CEO of company N'. Today you can still see such signatures on some programming or tech-related portals, however people are using built-in (global) signature where possible.

So the only case when signing post manually makes sense is when multiple people are using the account.
One case of that, known to me, is MicrosoftUkraine page on facebook.
Since the news are being collected and posted by multiple editors, posts are signed manually by "*(initials\name)" at the end of post\comment.

For your case, I'm not really sure if " " is occupation, initials (middle and last name accordingly?) or else.

Personally, I only sign messages manually when I need to mention my real name, or when username is likely to not be shown or known to receiver.

[Dangerous_Dave]

Having to remove it?

Because.

Why not just leave it in?

It spoils the flow.

Anyway, the complaints are coming from people on Gizmodo

Ah, Gizmodo

, which doesn't allow quoting anyway,

Interesting

so their complaints are just about reading/seeing it.

-IMP

Wait, what? Why did I just quote your signing off thing? Oh, because that's the alternative to deleting it. It ruins the flow, hence why I (would usually) delete it.

[Revel]

Having to remove it?

Because.

Why not just leave it in?

It spoils the flow.

Anyway, the complaints are coming from people on Gizmodo

Ah, Gizmodo

, which doesn't allow quoting anyway,

Interesting

so their complaints are just about reading/seeing it.

-IMP

Wait, what? Why did I just quote your signing off thing? Oh, because that's the alternative to deleting it. It ruins the flow, hence why I (would usually) delete it.

Seriously? You just did more work copying the signature as opposed just using line above it, yet your complaining it ruins the flow? Make it easier on yourself and only copy/paste what your quoting and then it wont ruin the flow.

If you copy/pasting a quote, you only select what you need and the signature becomes irrelevant. If you click the "Reply/MultiQuote" then the system automatically copies the post+signature for you so either way it makes no difference.

Finding it entertaining how people are making such a big deal out of it. Personally, I see no need for it but I don't think it's annoying, inconvenient, or "ruins the flow".

Edited by Revel, 28 July 2011 - 08:53 AM.

[Dangerous_Dave]

Seriously? You just did more work copying the signature as opposed just using line above it, yet your complaining it ruins the flow? Make it easier on yourself and only copy/paste what your quoting and then it wont ruin the flow.

If you copy/pasting a quote, you only select what you need and the signature becomes irrelevant. If you click the "Reply/MultiQuote" then the system automatically copies the post+signature for you so either way it makes no difference.

Finding it entertaining how people are making such a big deal out of it. Personally, I see no need for it but I don't think it's annoying, inconvenient, or "ruins the flow".

What are you talking about? I didn't copy anything. I hit reply, then filled in my answers.

[IceMetalPunk]

@Dangerous_Dave: What flow? I think the quote block breaks up the flow itself, doesn't it?

@Revel: Thank you! That's what I thought (and apparently what everyone thought the first 5 years I used it; seriously, why the sudden surge in signature interest?). I'm glad I'm not going completely crazy here.

-IMP

[Nocturne]

@Nocturne: I'm sorry to hear that .Although I hope you understand the letter analogy still holds. If you write a snail mail letter that's only a few lines, most people would still sign it.

No, that's not true. You could lose the envelope or the letter may not contain a header, so the signature is important. It can also be used in legal procedings if necessary... a signature to a forum post serves NO purpose whatsoever. And if you have your avatar, your name and your sig with links, then signing your posts is just plain overkill!!!!

Finding it entertaining how people are making such a big deal out of it.

No-one is making a big deal over it except IMP... he asked and people are replying! If he hadn't asked I doubt that this topic would have come up (although with the GMC you never know)...

[Desert Dog]

@Revel: Thank you! That's what I thought (and apparently what everyone thought the first 5 years I used it; seriously, why the sudden surge in signature interest?). I'm glad I'm not going completely crazy here.

Yeah, but the first 5 years from, what, the GMC? You said the issue was with another forum, wasn't it?

It isn't anything worth harping on about, but it's a bit, meh, why? your snail-mail analogy is frankly redundant, because snail-mail doesn't come with a username beside it (Ice Metal Punk) a custom forum title, an avatar (in your case.. IMP) and of course, the good old forum signature.

So every post you make is quite a blast of impishness. *tiddy bom tish!*

Granted, some snail mail people like to get all artsy, and doodle on their paper, and scrawl their initials, and that's their privilage, and like Nocturne said, if that's how you wish to express yourself, that's fine. But I mean, some people like to express themselves by using larger font, changing the font, etc, and they get told off, so...

[Nocturne]

Granted, some snail mail people like to get all artsy, and doodle on their paper, and scrawl their initials, and that's their privilage, and like Nocturne said, if that's how you wish to express yourself, that's fine. But I mean, some people like to express themselves by using larger font, changing the font, etc, and they get told off, so...

Actually, using different fonts, styles and colours is fine as long as it's in context... like IMP's signature! I mean if he spammed his signature every two lines he would get a warn too, the same as if someone used bold Impact font at 7points for his whole post.

[IceMetalPunk]

Finding it entertaining how people are making such a big deal out of it.

No-one is making a big deal over it except IMP... he asked and people are replying! If he hadn't asked I doubt that this topic would have come up (although with the GMC you never know)...

Well, I didn't mean to make a big deal out of it. It started with the eerily-sudden flurry of complaints over at Gizmodo, and since I use the same signature here, I was just curious if anyone else felt the same.

I suppose I've gotten my answer, and the answer is: yes and no. Some are annoyed by it, it seems, while others share my "it's not really important enough to be annoyed by" view.

In light of this information, I'll think about stopping my signature. I'll think about it. I suppose I've grown affectionate towards it over the years.

For now, though,

-IMP

*EDIT* Wow, that's the last time I reply without refreshing .

@Desert Dog: I don't put my name in any way in my signature. So it's just the username and the avatar. And in the analogy, consider the username the return address and the avatar the fancy custom stationary people used to use back when snail-mail was the de facto communication method. They still signed the bottoms of their letters.

Edited by IceMetalPunk, 28 July 2011 - 10:07 AM.

[Nocturne]

In light of this information, I'll think about stopping my signature. I'll think about it. I suppose I've grown affectionate towards it over the years.

For now, though,

-IMP

Well, I won't hate you for continuing to use it... it does no harm so who cares if some people don't like it?

[Desert Dog]

@Desert Dog: I don't put my name in any way in my signature. So it's just the username and the avatar. And in the analogy, consider the username the return address and the avatar the fancy custom stationary people used to use back when snail-mail was the de facto communication method. They still signed the bottoms of their letters.

Yeah, but why don't you. It's what it's their for, isn't it? I mean, signature... signature.. it's what signs your posts, dude. It sound weird to say, but why don't you use your signature for your signature?

And people can turn signatures off, and won't have to be 'annoyed' by yours any more, if they are.

[IceMetalPunk]

@Desert Dog: I don't put my name in any way in my signature. So it's just the username and the avatar. And in the analogy, consider the username the return address and the avatar the fancy custom stationary people used to use back when snail-mail was the de facto communication method. They still signed the bottoms of their letters.

Yeah, but why don't you. It's what it's their for, isn't it? I mean, signature... signature.. it's what signs your posts, dude. It sound weird to say, but why don't you use your signature for your signature?

And people can turn signatures off, and won't have to be 'annoyed' by yours any more, if they are.

Firstly...I forgot you could turn signatures off, honestly . Secondly, since I didn't remember you could turn off signatures, I figured there was no difference between typing it out and putting it in my auto-sig, and so I thought typing it out at least put a little more effort into personalizing my posts than allowing the computer to auto-do everything. To me, "personalization" should involve an actual, well, person .

'Course, now that you've reminded me signatures are optional, it's adding more pressure on me to just move it there...it's also crushed my previous valuation of signature advertising .

-IMP

*EDIT* Damn, I typed that without even thinking about it, it's just become such a habit...

Edited by IceMetalPunk, 28 July 2011 - 10:27 AM.

[Zeddy]

>Link Removed<

It makes someone hate you. Do you want someone to hate you?

MODERATOR EDIT: Link removed and names removed to prevent flaming. No need to implicate people that have not posted in the topic with outside links...

[9_6]

Dear IceMetalPunk,

Forums are not an exchange of letters.

Sincerely,
9_6

Edited by 9_6, 28 July 2011 - 10:35 AM.