Feature Announcements

[quadz08]

I don't they are styled differently, Chamber (but don't change them please I LIKE MY JOKE)

[izakthegoomba]

That's awesome, quadz...

[zoraster]

They are styled differently, but it's not surprisingly I still fell for it.

[chamber]

If they don't look like that then hard refresh.

[zoraster]

oh no. they do. I'm just saying, they look similar enough that when I'm not looking closely, if something says Show where the button usually is, I'm going to fall for it nearly every time.

[redFF]

hmm?

[Junpei]

Hey so I did the disable BBcode/color from sigs, and it also disables those things from posts. So like when I play mafia I can't see a vote that is bolded from something that isn't bolded.

Please fix so that I can not look at pointless signatures and play mafia

[chamber]

poke

Can you point me to the specific case where its disabling the bold for you in posts? Cause I have the option on and can still see bold/color in posts. Also which style are you using?

[Junpei]

Uh, well I can't see the bold "poke" which was bold before I switched it off. I can see the color in Amruns' mod post in a game I'm in though. It's purple.

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 4#p4175804
It's a few posts above this one, Amruns' purple post that is. (ps I cant see the bold that should be in this post either)

[Junpei]

Oh, style. I'm normal style, I've never changed it before - Desktop.

[chamber]

Have you hard refreshed?

[Junpei]

Oh, I haven't. That's a confusing issue, but it's better now; thanks.

[Katsuki]

No. It's not a "superior option" because signatures can actually have a use. For example, I quite like that IceGuy can advertise his game with a short little tag. I like that someone can put a one or two sentence quote at the bottom. A short sig actually helps break up posts a little bit in a good way when rereading a game thread.

But I don't need to read the same conversations over and over or a list of all their favorite movies or whatever. It encourages people to keep it short and sweet, which is exactly what it should be. And if you want to go longer, that's fine. You just have to accept that not everyone will be forced to read your signature.

Then don't read it? I don't see why a CHANGE has to be implemented to limit sigs, when there's not inherently any benefits to doing so in the first place?

For those who are going to argue that "OH BUT I DUN WANNA SEE WAH", it's like as if being a homophobe, and banning gay marriage just because you can't stand the sight of seeing gays out on the streets, when what they do really is not your choice to dictate how others should act.

Frankly I don't see any instances of say abuse that prompted this change in sig limit to be implemented?

Gee. Yes. I'm exactly like a homophobe because I don't think it's in our best interest have 8 lines of multicolored text between each post in a game. Way to elevate this conversation. It serves very little purpose other than your desire to make everyone else see "fluffy fluffy" each time as if that's somehow a great contribution. But you know what? If that's what you prioritize as your signature, fine! But fit it into 4 lines. OR just deal with the fact that everyone won't see it each and every time they see your post. They'll probably click it once to see it and move on.

The thing is that the people who are complaining most about this are those who have long signatures. And for many who did have them, they went "welp. I'll just edit myself a little bit." But no. For you it's a matter of civil rights and everyone who feels differently is an asshole bigot who's just out to get you.

And guess what? We already did restrict it. Lots of forums allow jpgs in their signature lines. We do not.

Um, you're completely taking it to another point. I merely compared it to a similar example.

Sure, we're all entitled to our own opinions. But what is it for someone else to dictate how you choose to express yourself. Only thing I see from you is that "OH TEEHEE LOOK PEOPLE WITH LONG SIGNATURES BITCHING". I've been saying that so long as the signatures don't do harm to others, why bother restricting them? You however feel that you have to go all MOI. It's fun how you have to take my example about the gay rights thing and twist it into me calling you a bigot though.

Spoiler:

No wonder Americans have so much conflict, because everyone thinks that it's their business to meddle into the affairs of others when it doesn't concern them at all.

Now if people were having problems with those with large signatures, then I'd expect those people to voice their opinions, but all I've heard from you is "LOLOL BITCH MOAR DEALWITHIT".


/tootiredtobotherwritingmore

[Katsuki]

oh well arguing any further is pointless if this be what mith desires but really.

Also quadz.

[zoraster]

Sure, we're all entitled to our own opinions. But what is it for someone else to dictate how you choose to express yourself. Only thing I see from you is that "OH TEEHEE LOOK PEOPLE WITH LONG SIGNATURES BITCHING". I've been saying that so long as the signatures don't do harm to others, why bother restricting them? You however feel that you have to go all MOI. It's fun how you have to take my example about the gay rights thing and twist it into me calling you a bigot though.

Oh? and what were you trying to accomplish with that particular example then? You were trying to paint me with the same brush as small minded people who take away the fundamental rights of others.

The point is that long signatures get in the way, clutter things, and distract from the content within the series of posts. What they offer to the site in return is negligible compared to what they could contain if they were simply edited to be four lines or less. It's not an overly burdensome requirement, and it improves the ease of reading the threads.

[Cyberbob]

Sure, we're all entitled to our own opinions. But what is it for someone else to dictate how you choose to express yourself. Only thing I see from you is that "OH TEEHEE LOOK PEOPLE WITH LONG SIGNATURES BITCHING". I've been saying that so long as the signatures don't do harm to others, why bother restricting them? You however feel that you have to go all MOI. It's fun how you have to take my example about the gay rights thing and twist it into me calling you a bigot though.

Oh? and what were you trying to accomplish with that particular example then? You were trying to paint me with the same brush as small minded people who take away the fundamental rights of others.

The point is that long signatures get in the way, clutter things, and distract from the content within the series of posts. What they offer to the site in return is negligible compared to what they could contain if they were simply edited to be four lines or less. It's not an overly burdensome requirement, and it improves the ease of reading the threads.

all this dumb shit is irrelevant if the thing is simply made optional.

[zoraster]

sure.

[Cyberbob]

so shut up about the dumb shit and focus on having it made optional so that everyone wins

[Junpei]

Spoiler:

No w if people were havinder Americans have so much conflict, because everyone thinks that it's their business to meddle into the affairs of others when it doesn't

Oh look - a racist. By the way, your gay rights bullshit is irrelevant for the following reason: gay marriage isn't inherently put in front of me and spammed.

Your signature would be less than four lines if not for the useless game advertisement bullshit which makes no sense.

Experience puberty, then decide if you should be racist or not.

[Cyberbob]

Spoiler:

No w if people were havinder Americans have so much conflict, because everyone thinks that it's their business to meddle into the affairs of others when it doesn't

Oh look - a racist.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[UberNinja]

1. uhhh, four whole pages over spoilered sigs? come on people, its not that big a deal
2. quadz' sig owns, he is now my new forum idol for the next 5 or 6 minutes
3. in b4 cyberbob post saying how gay my post is

[Cyberbob]

i try not to call things 'gay' on account of it being homophobic but your post certainly is something

[UberNinja]

[xRECKONERx]

PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENISH

- Gamma

[Bella]

Firstly, I've always been open to tinkering with things bob, what I wasn't open to was your demand that I completely remove the feature until I had it exactly how you wanted.
Secondly, anis 'protest' is delt with by the new option I added that everyone seems to have missed. His sig seems perfectly reasonable to me atm. (though I'll likely have to change that so that I can see if it needs to be removed, sad days)
Thirdly, this idea was miths. I obviously chose all the specifics of implementation as I programed it but he oked the final product. As such I'm not at all likely to scrap the entire thing unless he explicitly told me to. I am open to the idea of either making it optional or only spoilering lines in excess of 4, as I already said.

It must be hard, trying to find problems for all your solutions.