Forum signatures preference

  •   21.8% - No signatures at all - 83
  •   41.3% - Changing affects all posts, past and future - 157
  •   12.1% - Changing only affects future posts - 46
  •   24.7% - Doesn't matter/don't care - 94

You must login to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register to get one!

  • Avatar of x87bliss x87bliss May 16, 2009 at 07:39 UTC - 0 likes

    Would it be possible, and practical, to use a kind of script that would allow Tree Control like expansion and contraction of the signatures? Using the word Tree is a bad example, because it'd only be one node (the sig itself).

    Users viewing the forum could have options in their CP to set the default of the sigs (expanded, contracted, (as networkerror suggests) expanded once per author per page).

    In addition, it might be possible to track the size of the sig client side using the script, and if it's too long, truncate it with ellipsis with the option to fully expand it.

    I'm just throwing that out there. It may be too complex for what it's worth, I'm not sure how flexible the forums are, or what's possible (web programming is not my thing).

  • Avatar of Reanmachine Reanmachine May 14, 2009 at 02:56 UTC - 0 likes

    Frankly we should have an option to disable signiatures. So if I don't like to view them I can turn them off, but others who don't care or do care can just keep them on.

  • Avatar of laconic1 laconic1 May 13, 2009 at 01:38 UTC - 0 likes

    Personally I turn them off. I think turning off effecting all posts would be best option.

  • Avatar of KalChoedan KalChoedan May 08, 2009 at 12:02 UTC - 0 likes

    As long as I can turn them off I don't care.

  • Avatar of Squeeg Squeeg May 06, 2009 at 02:13 UTC - 0 likes

    The poll options are kind of... eh. I don't care if the sig updates past posts or not, but I do care about having them. Some of them have relatively useful links or info... or they're good for a laugh. I agree that it shows a bit of personality per user. So maybe an option to just not view the ones that annoy you would be well and fine.

  • Avatar of ckknight ckknight May 05, 2009 at 14:42 UTC - 0 likes

    Interesting idea, networkerror. That and having an image limit (even 1 image would be more than enough) along with a character limit would be quite viable, imo.

  • Avatar of eveningztar eveningztar May 05, 2009 at 12:22 UTC - 0 likes

    Im agreeng with ckknight there.It must be up to the poster.And it should b up 2 the viewer to c them or not,the signatures. Personally i have no problem with signatures. It often says something about the person behind the signature,but limits are to be prefered.And now over to something completly different.

  • Avatar of daveorama daveorama May 05, 2009 at 02:31 UTC - 0 likes

    I agree with ckknight

  • Avatar of networkerror networkerror May 04, 2009 at 00:53 UTC - 0 likes

    I would like it if the signature was only show once per thread per post author, no since showing the same sig ten times in the same thread.

  • Avatar of septor septor Apr 30, 2009 at 13:55 UTC - 0 likes

    Forum signatures are why I have imageshack globally blocked!


Posted on
Apr 29, 2009
Last updated
Apr 29, 2009
Voted on
380 times