View Poll Results: Should the forum enforce a maximum size limit on signatures?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    4 20.00%
  • No

    5 25.00%
  • I don't care -- trust the admins

    11 55.00%
Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    JustRick's Avatar
    JustRick is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    192

    Really, Really Long Signatures

    Would the community be willing to entertain the idea of restricting the size of signatures? There are a few posters (we love you guys) with sigs that are 15 or more lines long. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it does get to be a hassle scrolling through L - O - N - G sigs to get to a six-word post. I've been on other boards that fix height at four lines or "N" pixels. Would this work here?

    This isn't a hill I'd die on, but I think it is at least worth discussing.

  2. Ads
  3. #2
    Todd is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    0
    I don't think it's necessary to restrict sig lines. Right now, the people who have huge sig lines appear to be the ones who list every gun they own and it doesn't seem like there are a lot of people that do it. While I don't feel it necessary to list every gun you own, I also feel it doesn't do any harm except for causing me to do one extra flick of the mouse wheel to get to the next post. Until it becomes a rampant problem, I can't see imposing a restriction .... but that's ultimately up to js.

  4. #3
    TOF's Avatar
    TOF
    TOF is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Arizona
    Posts
    3,015
    Wow, you have been a Forum member all of 45 days and now you want to run things.

    I think the Forum still belongs to JS so I for one will go along with his preference regarding this and similar items.

  5. #4
    bruce333's Avatar
    bruce333 is offline HGF Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wilson's Mills, NC
    Posts
    2,495
    Quote Originally Posted by JustRick View Post
    There are a few posters (we love you guys) with sigs that are 15 or more lines long. .
    I don't see "a few" with long sigs as a problem. I'm on some other forums that it is a problem, and one forum that severly restricts sig length and content. To me the one with the restictions is more annoying than the long sigs. Punishing the many for the few...
    Bruce, Life Member: NRA, NCRPA, GRNC, GOA

    Naval Air Museum Barbers Point

    "I personally think we developed language because of our deep inner need to complain."--Jane Wagner
    "The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
    -Isaac Asimov

  6. #5
    BeefyBeefo's Avatar
    BeefyBeefo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,873
    Unless it's just my account, the signature is limited to two lines. This was probably put in place after the long signatures were made. I had a 4 line signature, and when I tried to edit one word, it said that it was too long and I was only allowed two lines in my signature. So, unless it's just my account, these long signatures were probably "grandfathered" in, and cannot be edited unless they are shortened.

    -Jeff-

  7. #6
    JustRick's Avatar
    JustRick is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by TOF View Post
    Wow, you have been a Forum member all of 45 days and now you want to run things.
    I had an opinion and I shared it in what I think was a polite and respectful manner.

  8. #7
    JustRick's Avatar
    JustRick is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by bruce333 View Post
    I don't see "a few" with long sigs as a problem. I'm on some other forums that it is a problem, and one forum that severly restricts sig length and content. To me the one with the restictions is more annoying than the long sigs. Punishing the many for the few...
    I've been active on a boat-building forum for six years. On that forum the sigs are limited to something like 50 characters, and no images. THAT is a tight restriction. People like to list the boats they've built in their sigs and not many fit into 50 characters. It mns a lt'o crtv abbrvns tho.

  9. #8
    bruce333's Avatar
    bruce333 is offline HGF Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wilson's Mills, NC
    Posts
    2,495
    Quote Originally Posted by JustRick View Post
    I've been active on a boat-building forum for six years. On that forum the sigs are limited to something like 50 characters, and no images.
    The one I'm thinking of is limited to 35 characters, and no hyper links or images. I had to put my "links of interest" on my profile page on that forum.
    Bruce, Life Member: NRA, NCRPA, GRNC, GOA

    Naval Air Museum Barbers Point

    "I personally think we developed language because of our deep inner need to complain."--Jane Wagner
    "The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
    -Isaac Asimov

  10. #9
    James NM's Avatar
    James NM is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,091
    I also have a problem with some of the signatures.

    I think the board should assign the logo in Todd's signature to everyone!

  11. #10
    unpecador's Avatar
    unpecador is offline Senior Member HGF Gold Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,862
    I don't care

  12. #11
    ghost stang's Avatar
    ghost stang is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Newton, NC
    Posts
    54
    I think this forum is great the way it is. On the issue of sigs its self expression. If you start by limiting the length next time you know we cant have our pictures. I say leave it the way they are. Everything seems to be perfect as it is.

  13. #12
    JeffWard's Avatar
    JeffWard is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    St Pete Beach, FL
    Posts
    1,932
    It already IS restricted...

    Get a bigger monitor! LOL

    Jeff

  14. #13
    Ptarmigan is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    723
    I was not allowed to have a signature over two lines either but it really does not matter to me. I think Rick asked a valid question, but feel that it is for the owner of the forum to decide on such matters. I like the forum the way it is and I am just happy to be a member.

  15. #14
    js's Avatar
    js
    js is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    3,064
    To be honest guys........ I never even looked at what is allowed or what the settings are. It's currently set at the software default....whatever that is... I'll look into it when a get some free time... free time is a luxury for me right now.
    "bing bang boom! hair out...hamburger time" - William Murderface

  16. #15
    DevilsJohnson is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,373
    I wouldn't think sigs would be an issue unless it started becoming a space/bandwidth issue. Their are some forums I am on where people use some pretty big and complex graphics. Being for the most part people just have a little witty txt It can't be using much server resources. If it was the site admin would have looked at it by now and made a limit.

    So I voted I don't care. What ever the site admin sets works for me. I didn't join because I could make a big sig....lol...I think I had a bigger one before with my gun collection list. I like seeing what people do with them really. Many of them are damn entertaining

  17. #16
    OMSBH44 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Santa Teresa, NM
    Posts
    234

    George?

    Speaking of signature, JS what does your's mean? I don't get it!

    Revolutionary vs. republican? Huh?

    Thanks.

  18. #17
    js's Avatar
    js
    js is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by OMSBH44 View Post
    Speaking of signature, JS what does your's mean? I don't get it!

    Revolutionary vs. republican? Huh?

    Thanks.
    George Washington was a revolutionary... I just like GW

    MLK was a republican... unlike the minority sheep who blindly follow democrats today. MLK stood for independence...not dependence.
    "bing bang boom! hair out...hamburger time" - William Murderface

  19. #18
    OMSBH44 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Santa Teresa, NM
    Posts
    234

    Cool

    Ah, OK.

    I never thought of GW as a revolutionary. Maybe I'm thinking of a different GW.

    As far as MLK goes, I'll have to take your word that he was a republican.

    Anyway, if you have to explain the joke....

    Thanks.

  20. #19
    JustRick's Avatar
    JustRick is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    192
    After a little investigation, I found that the user control panel allows me to turn off signature display. Now everyone can be happy -- I don't have to scroll past big areas of repetitious text, and you can if you want to. It's all about liberty...

  21. #20
    oak1971's Avatar
    oak1971 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    354
    Vote No.

  22. #21
    oak1971's Avatar
    oak1971 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    354
    Creating solutions to problems that do not exist is usually the providence of liberal politicians or bureaucrats.

  23. #22
    js's Avatar
    js
    js is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by OMSBH44 View Post
    Ah, OK.

    I never thought of GW as a revolutionary. Maybe I'm thinking of a different GW.
    You may have heard of that little war back in the 1700's against England...

    Quote Originally Posted by OMSBH44 View Post
    As far as MLK goes, I'll have to take your word that he was a republican.
    ...

    Why Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican


    By Frances Rice

    It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

    It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860's, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's.

    During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was President Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

    Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Senator Al Gore, Sr. And after he became president, John F. Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.

    In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

    Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860's, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

    Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans.

    Critics of Republican Senator Barry Goldwater who ran for president against Democrat President Lyndon Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation.

    Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater, also ignore the fact that President Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on January 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only thirty five words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Viet Nam War, President Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that Nigger preacher."

    Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Democrat Senator Robert Byrd who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan.

    Another former "Dixiecrat" is Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings who put up the Confederate flag over the state capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd praised Senator Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Democrats denounced Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about Senator Strom Thurmond. Senator Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Senator Byrd and Senator Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched.
    The thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970's with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy" which was an effort on the Part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats.

    Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous.

    After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3rd kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29th. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004 blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Bill Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites).

    Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30-40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. Over $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.

    In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.
    Quote Originally Posted by OMSBH44 View Post
    Anyway, if you have to explain the joke....

    Thanks.
    It's not really a joke, just an observation. George Washington was a great general and leader... something this country can't produce any longer and well... The MLK thing is self-explanatory...
    Last edited by js; 11-01-2008 at 12:59 AM.
    "bing bang boom! hair out...hamburger time" - William Murderface

  24. #23
    DeltaNu1142 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by js View Post
    The MLK thing is self-explanatory...
    I'm going to make that my signature...

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •