Page 1 of 1

No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 4th, '13, 13:10
by sherubtse
I have tried to add a signature to my posts, but the software tells me that I am "not authorized" to do so.

So how the heck does one obtain such authorisation? :?

Thanks.

Best wishes,
sherubtse

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 4th, '13, 13:19
by Chip
Sadly, we had to disable the signature feature years ago due to abuse by members, bloggers, spammers ... :roll:

I will take another look at this feature.

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 4th, '13, 14:29
by tenuki
If you decide to re-enable it can you make sure that we can choose not to display it? One of my favorite things about teachat is not seeing signatures. Really keeps the information flow clean and fast.

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 4th, '13, 16:17
by sherubtse
Chip wrote:Sadly, we had to disable the signature feature years ago due to abuse by members, bloggers, spammers ... :roll:

I will take another look at this feature.
Thanks for the reply, Chip. I hope you can re-introduce it. :)

Best wishes,
sherubtse

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 18:39
by Milo
I'm with tenuki. Signatures are not only distracting but also redundant with avatars and usernames. Write with heart and you'll rarely need one.

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 19:42
by edkrueger
tenuki wrote:If you decide to re-enable it can you make sure that we can choose not to display it? One of my favorite things about teachat is not seeing signatures. Really keeps the information flow clean and fast.
+1

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 19:49
by Remick
tenuki wrote:If you decide to re-enable it can you make sure that we can choose not to display it? One of my favorite things about teachat is not seeing signatures. Really keeps the information flow clean and fast.
Milo wrote:I'm with tenuki. Signatures are not only distracting but also redundant with avatars and usernames. Write with heart and you'll rarely need one.
Count me as in agreement with the above.

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 21:03
by Chip
Personally, me too ... it drove me nuts with the visual interuptions after almost every post in the flow of the forum. It is nice not having the distractions that are also redundant.

Many forums I view, they are spammy anyway.

Disabling the sigs was one of only things the other mod at the time and I agreed upon. Sigs prior to that could include links, graphics, almost whatever.

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 21:33
by Poohblah
Chip wrote:Personally, me too ... it drove me nuts with the visual interuptions after almost every post in the flow of the forum. It is nice not having the distractions that are also redundant.
+1

Re: No-Go on Sig

Posted: Jun 7th, '13, 21:55
by sherubtse
Milo wrote:I'm with tenuki. Signatures are not only distracting but also redundant with avatars and usernames. Write with heart and you'll rarely need one.
I guess it all depends on what is allowed in the sig.

But considering the response to my suggestion, I get the message .... loud and clear! :lol:

Best wishes,
sherubtse