Einobi Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) We have seen some long and big sized fonts in signature recently. Many people here took an issue with the poster for this 'big' signature and reported him (I suppose). I take no stand on this matter, neither approving it nor disapproving it (as the poster has valid points in favour of his arguments which I agree to a certain extent). I would like Swtor to implement restrictions on the usage of signature so that 'objectable' signature are not made possible by the act of the poster. If the rule is 'not more than 4 lines' then implement a cap within the system and not let poster key in the 5th line in their signature. If big font size is an issue, then implement a cap on the font size. This is the way to go forward as a solution, in my opinion. It is useless to target a single poster through mean of possibly infraction point or warning because the next ignorant poster in future is going to repeat the same episode. And it may be repeated again and again without end just because it is possible for them to do so (not by intent but by ignorance). PS: And by the way, if any of you have an issue in a thread that is not related to the topic of the thread, start a new thread addressing the matter and not to response within that thread thus de-tracking away from the topic discussion. Too many threads have lost their focus of discussion because of too many irrelevant responses in the thread. It is irrelevant in the context of that thread, but not irrelevant in a thread of its own. If it is something that you find not worthy to start a new thread, then equivalently it is also not worthy to response in the thread whose focus is not the response concern. Edited January 20, 2014 by Einobi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OddballEasyEight Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I'm pretty sure they will update their rules now that someone has circumvented them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sadishist Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Common sense should be a rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwenBrooks Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Common sense should be a rule. Some have none it seems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPryde Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Common sense should be a rule. "Common sense" is misnamed, as it is not common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwenBrooks Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) "Common sense" is misnamed, as it is not common. "Common sense" so rare its a god damn super power .... I can feel my "common sense" tingling Edited January 20, 2014 by OwenBrooks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexDougherty Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Common sense should be a rule. Common sense is the ability to see what should be done, not what is prescribed, and as such is impossible to codify as a rule. The nearest would be "Don't deliberately take advantage of something we haven't specifically prohibited if it's antisocial" and even then there are loopholes and gaps, and arguments about whether it's antisocial or not. In this case however it clearly is antisocial, which is why the guy is on my forum ignore list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShmickB Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 While I agree with the above vis-a-vis the particular offending signature, I thought I'd play Devil's Advocate and point out that "Common Sense" is often just used to cover the prejudices common at a given time... It used be "common sense" that women couldn't do "men's work", until women proved they could. It used be "common sense" that you couldn't trust certain racial/ethnic groups, until most people realised we're all basically the same. It used be "common sense" that homosexuality was a choice and evil, until people woke up to the fact it is neither. So I say be careful invoking "common sense" too much, as it is often just a cover we use to not have to think about the alternatives. I dare say there is a lot of current "common sense" that 50 years hence we will see was wrong just as the above shows our parents/grandparents were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelersWay Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 We have seen some long and big sized fonts in signature recently. Many people here took an issue with the poster for this 'big' signature and reported him (I suppose). I take no stand on this matter, neither approving it nor disapproving it (as the poster has valid points in favour of his arguments which I agree to a certain extent). Do you have a link to these supposed valid points? I would like to see them because if they amount to nothing more than the system "allowed" him to configure his signature as such, then I don't consider that valid. I don't care what the system allows one to do for signature creation, it was completely unwarranted and unnecessary. I am reminded of the old adage that states "Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do it." It's not even a matter of common sense, but simply a matter of common courtesy and respect for everyone who posts in the forums and the forums themselves. The poster in questions showed neither courtesy nor respect for either and was, quite frankly, obnoxious to say the least by creating his signature in such a manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sangrar Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Do you have a link to these supposed valid points? I would like to see them because if they amount to nothing more than the system "allowed" him to configure his signature as such, then I don't consider that valid. I don't care what the system allows one to do for signature creation, it was completely unwarranted and unnecessary. I am reminded of the old adage that states "Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do it." It's not even a matter of common sense, but simply a matter of common courtesy and respect for everyone who posts in the forums and the forums themselves. The poster in questions showed neither courtesy nor respect for either and was, quite frankly, obnoxious to say the least by creating his signature in such a manner. Luckily Bioware seems to think so too, they did remove that god awful sig after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einobi Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 Einstein has no "common sense" really. If he had, he would not have come up with the discovery that no other people in their common sense would have thought of in the first place. Having no "common sense" is not an evil to be banished but one that should be embraced for there are many unknown unknowns and known unknowns out there that our common sense has blocked our mind from 'seeing'. Only those who have no "common sense" are able to see what all of us can't see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tekhiun Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Common sense should be a rule. Not everything that is common sense is correct to be fair. I would say "Don't be a douche" is more applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beslley Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Not everything that is common sense is correct to be fair. I would say "Don't be a douche" is more applicable. So basically Wheaton's Law "Don't be a d***" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dev Post EricMusco Posted January 21, 2014 Dev Post Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) I thought it might be good to pop in and comment on this thread. I think when it comes to what is acceptable in your signature, the best approach is to use common sense, as others have alluded too. Signatures, like everything else on the forums, can lead to both warnings and infractions appropriately. If we think someone has made a fairly disruptive signature but appears to have done so out of a lack of knowledge of the rules, then we will simply warn the user that that behavior isn't allowed. In circumstances where it is clear they are doing it intentionally, knowing that it is breaking the rules, they will receive an infraction accordingly. Look at almost all of the forum rules, it comes down to be nice and don't be disruptive -eric Edited January 21, 2014 by EricMusco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelersWay Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Look almost all of the forum rules, it comes down to be nice and don't be disruptive -eric As noble as that concept is, the Interwebs would cease to exist if that ever came to be. Edited January 21, 2014 by TravelersWay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts