Being attacked for my signature line has reminded me (as I just PM'd someone) of the time when someone called joepublic came in here and attacked people for using emoticons.

I know not everyone - possibly not anyone - likes signatures. I know, from the joepublic time, that not everyone likes emoticons. I also know that some people like/use either/both.

I thought we didn't need no steenkin' rools, so this is just a public appeal to people not to nitpick and not to attack for stoopid reasons. I could understand it if I had a dodgy political statement in my signature line, stating my position on abortion or capital punishment or something - but I don't.

In fact I've seen some pretty funny/thought-provoking stuff in signature lines on other websites, most notably the Lonely Planet's Thorn Tree site, my fave from which is:

If you can't see the bright side, polish the dull side.

[In fact, I like that one so much....Hm. I'm getting ideas.]

Sure, I found some of the signatures on the LP site kind of annoying - but I learned to ignore them. I've been accused of being "an aspiring intellectual" - gah! - horrible, horrible thought! - and the suggestion has been made that the signature line I use causes people to take me less seriously. Good Lord in Heaven. I don't really aspire to anything - I just chug along, enjoying the world and my place in it, and as long as no one attacks me for spurious reasons, then I'm happy. But apparently my signature line alone brands me as a moron, despite whatever well-modulated, erudite phraseology I use and despite what message that well-modulated, erudite phraseology is attempting to convey.

So be it. I use emoticons, too!



[/plea not to nitpick]

If you can't see the bright side, polish the dull side.

Given that any community will tend to develop established practice, the issue is a simple one: Does one wish to modify one's behaviour to fit in with the established practice of the community, or does one wish not to? Personally, I prefer the former course. Thus, I don't use signatures here, as established practice has them as unwelcome. Elsewhere, notably on Usenet, I use a variety of signature lines. A little time taken upon encountering a "new" virtual community can help one determine what that community's established practices are, and then one can decide if one wishes to accept those practices or not. While one is free to choose whether or not to do so, one should not be surprised if, upon deciding not to, one receives a less than enthusiastic response.

While one is free to choose whether or not to do so, one should not be surprised if, upon deciding not to, one receives a less than enthusiastic response.

Fair enough. The "less than enthusiastic response" could certainly be more perliter than it has been, though, is all. Whatever any of us may be unenthusiastic about, it would be nice if we could all (myself included, and yes, I AM taking note!) refrain from attacking others. In fact, I know we COULD. I just wish we WOULD. (and I am well aware that 'most everyone round here does - which I do appreciate)

If you can't see the bright side, polish the dull side.

>The "less than enthusiastic response" could certainly be more perliter than it has been, though, is all.

Indeed. The turgid excess of "one" in my earlier post was an attempt to generalise the post, to make it plain that it was addressing an issue, not a specific occurrence of that issue.

All philosophizing aside, and spoken as one who has used a signature to provide a link to his obscure words site, here's what the issue comes down to for some folks: you can make your sig as clever as Dorothy Parker or as wise as Bertrand Russell but on the, say, fifth reading it starts to become an annoyance--and of course it actually starts much sooner if you're seen as proselytizing.

It may just be to do with the software here. Because signature lines don't look particularly different than the main text you end up reading them as part of the post, then get irritated after the fourth or fifth time. Maybe if they looked more different so I could skip reading them, I'd feel differently, but they don't so I don't. Nothing personal, honest - lots of us did it at some time, it just doesn't seem to work well here.

My tuppence ha'penny: it's a darned good signature as they go, MG, with fine sentiments to which I'd happily subscribe. But I have to agree with those above that for some reason (probably format) signatures don't work very well on this Board.

A notable exception was made a while back for Max Q's persistent signature link to very useful Awadian Info (nothing at all like steenkin' rules, natch ), but..

I can adapt to signatures perfectly well, and have done so. But that involves ignoring them in any case, doesn't it? And if you like a particular phrase (yep, "polish the dull side" is a goody) then you can always raise a thread on it, link it up with other similar phrases, blah blah. Suppose what I'm saying is that this being a language/word Board does make a difference.

Well said, Fischlein.

I also agree with tsuwm, sjm and jmh.

mg, while I can see your point, for me, signatures detract from posts, at least in this wordy board. Not that this is in the same league (don't get me wrong, mg!) but I'm reminded of a thread elsewhere on this fine board wherein we discussed Dubya's pronunciation of "nuclear." It got to the point where the pronunciation interfered with the message. I think signatures can do that too. If I know a signature is coming, it's hard to concentrate on the post.

And, an aside to wordminstrel: don't attack others for what you presume to be attacks (these are all people who know each other and enjoy sparring), especially when you are living in a particularly fragile glass house, your own self.

Mostly it's been said, but I'd like to add one point about the difference between sig lines and emoticons. Emoticons add a dimension of meaning to a post that is missing from the normal communication; meaning that is generally communicated by body language of one sort or another in face to face spoken language, so they have redeeming social value. They can get irritating if they turn into motion gifs, but even then, they are generally small and not so bad. An equivalent of signature lines is the little pictures associated with individual posters that are sometimes seen on message boards, but they don't carry the sometimes apparent didactic baggage that verbal signature lines do and they perform the useful function of giving a quick ID of the poster. They can get severely irritating if they get big and are motion gifs. I have seen a board where they got so out of hand that there was a minor war created. Fortunately, the people on that board were sufficiently community to keep it from turning into a destructive flame war.

Aside to mg: Your sig line about serving the board reminds me of that line that seemed to show up in every '50s generation ship sci-fi story, "The ship is all! Praised be the ship!"

Up till when the web took off, when people would post to the internet they would include a signature, or tag, line at the end of their posts as a form of disclaimer - so readers understood the posters were speaking in an official capacity for their employers. It was standard form to try to be clever and original.

I started out with "My employers don't tell me what to say, and I don't tell them where to stick it."

Later I changed to "My employers disagree with everything I say, write, think, believe, feel, do, or plan to do."

They often included contact information as well. Eventually, they changed to only saying clever (and sometimes no-so clever) things and including contact info - little or no attempt at disclaimer.

The general etiquette was to try to keep them in 5 lines, as bandwidth - even along backbones - was restricted, but mostly because rates of character transmission were so low, it was *very* painful to have to download these things sometimes. Five long lines at 300 baud and no compression is excruciating. Also, this was back when a person might only have a few megabytes in a personal account ... and who wants to waste space with nonessential stuff when they save messages?

I read them the first few times and then I don't even see them any more - my brain usually just filters 'em out.

k

Thank y'all for your moderate responses. Gad, I love this place!

I expect my sig line will disappear eventually...honest. It had actually occurred to me to ditch it, since I only put the purple one in in the "bad ol' days" when the sentiment seemed to require repeating (which it obviously does not, now). But for now, I'm keeping it - just to piss off wordminstrel. [naughty-child e] [bolshy e]

In fact, what a great sig line: Only doing this to piss off wordminstrel

Must...resist...temptation...

If you can't see the bright side, polish the dull side.

*giggle*