Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > Feedback > Religious/Political statements in signatures

Religious/Political statements in signatures (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Gossamer  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2006, 12:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by SSharon
Although 'good' is always subjective I did not say your opinion of the sig needs to be good. Maybe it would be more clear if I said that it would be ok if the sig supported your position without implying some sort of negative consequence on your opponent.

support our troops is a good point though. even things that promote one side can be at the expense of another. getting offended by someone supporting their national defense is different than a sig that says nuke israel.
This is why I think the only fair thing to do is all or none.

I think people know when their sigs are in good taste and wouldn't object to changing it if they got a PM from another member.
But I think that people with offensive sigs tend to be a bit less reasonable and more biased, and most likely less will to be agreeable. If they care so much about a particular issue that they'd make a sig about it, they're pretty secure on the issue and most likely unwilling to give up any ground. I'm not saying no one would, but I'm saying quite a few wouldn't.
     
Corpsecorps
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 05:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
I am very tempted to agree with you, Gossamer. However, those signatures remind everyone who's who, and although there are some very annoying ones,...
I agree. Signatures kept small can serve the same purpose as an avatar, but i've already seen several rather obnoxious ones.

Why not small restricted avatars for identification and no sigs?
     
Corpsecorps
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 05:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by red rocket View Post
Personally, I have placed several posters on ignore, purely on account of their unnecessarily religious signatures.
Beautiful. You essentially say people shouldn't be upset by sigs earlier, then you say you have ignored people because of their religious ones, all while displaying the avatar you've adopted?


I hope double posts aren't a no-no.
     
Blasphemy
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Circa 1225, from the Old French
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 31, 2006, 12:06 PM
 
Dude, what's up with bumping the old stuff?
And you're on this avatar kick still.
     
Corpsecorps
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 1, 2007, 06:45 AM
 
Doh!

Apologies, all.

I keep forgetting to check the dates after finding threads using search and i happen to belong to forums where posting in old threads on a topic is preferred to beginning new ones. I was looking for threads about rules regarding avatars (which i noted there are none of) and sig size.

Will try to watch dates in future.
     
 
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:23 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,