I agree with Cinderella and others.

This policy/rule change was not notified to anyone - just snuck in there.

It's like trying to open a walnut with a sledge hammer. If the mods have a problem with a particular users sig line, why not just email them?

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2025866#Post2025866

Note the date. Note that it's from Announcements/Important Information, the first forum on the forum list.

I never even see the announcements board as I have a shortcut straight to GQII.

I very much doubt many people go into the announcements board anyway.

Ah, the dance of the moving goalposts.

You said When I pointed out that it was, back in February, you responded That may well be true, but if you don't take the trouble to look at the Announcements board, then you don't have the information you need to make a statement like "This policy/rule change was not notified to anyone."

and yet THIS discussion is taking place on the busiest board of MB - not hidden away on a board no one reads.

22 posts in 2.5 years NMDreams - very glad this issue has you so fired up. What is your usual posting name?

My usual posting name is NM Dreams. My posting history has no relevance to the subject under discussion.

But since you don't seem to be convinced that an announcement made on a board labelled as "Announcements" counts as notifying anyone of a rule change, I don't see that there is any more that I can say on the subject.

Capriciousness.....this is an example of a capricious rule change.



I can't tell you how much I detest and despise having the rules changed in the middle of the game. I find it despicable and deplorable. I find it to be downright anathema. And dulling.

c'mon Cinders - I agree with you but I think you're a little over the top.

Well, yeah, probably! And the problem with feeling passionately about something is.........????

Besides, the alliteration was fun.

Actually, I am finding Cinderella's posts very useful.

Thank you.

c00per

Zaffy

I moved your post to Miscellaneous Feedback/Technical problems.
Yours is a question for board administration.


LINK TO ZAFFY'S POST


Thank you.

c00per

C00per,

What if famous (or amost famous) quotations were allowed - e.g., a quote out of Bartlett's, but quotes of other posters here were forbidden? Is that a workable compromise?

Thank you.

I am passing these suggestions/complaints/comments on to those who actually write "the rules".

Keep them coming.

c00per

I wanted to agree with something that was already brought up.

Instead of changing the way people use signatures, why not directly "deal" with those that misuse/abuse them?

If what they post is a violation of TOS (regardless if its in their sig line or in the main body of their comments), then enforce the TOS...and if they repeatedly violate the TOS, then suspend or ban their account as is done on other boards. Sure, they can create a new one, but for anyone who is serious, they should hopefully learn from their mistake. If they don't, limiting the sig line won't change their actions.

Make sense?

Owl...every time I see c00per's name I think of you...it looks like two big owl eyes peering over the board.
As for your post, I think the mods can decide who should be suspended or banned based on their criteria.

Wasn't that exactly what I said, MEDC?

I wasn't determining who gets banned or not...simply offering that enforcing the TOS against those who violate it rather than blanket changing the way sig lines work for everyone might be a better option. It shouldn't matter if the infraction is in the signature line or in the main body of the message. Both are violations of TOS...changing the way the sig lines work really won't enforce the TOS. Imposing restrictions against those who violate it is more likely to be effective.

yes, Owl...that was what you said. I guess what I mean to say is that they can figure out who needs to be banned or suspended without input from board members.

Agreed. Its absolutely up to the moderators to consider my comments and suggestions or not.

Here's what doesn't make sense to me...why is full UBB code, which is used to make a link in your sig line, being counted as characters? In other words, a link looks something like this:


This link is just the link this this page, but you get the point. This now counts as around 100 characters, even though on my sig line you would only see "Inside the Wayward Mind" which is 23 characters.

My point is...the TITLE of the link should be the only thing that counts as characters...

On another note...W2S has the idea that we are going to have text files on our desktops, which will contain our full sig lines with links to our "stories" etc. Whenever we want to use it, we will just copy and paste it at the bottom of our posts and the heck with the "sig lines."

The whole thing is silly!!

Thank you very much.

I know I am being overly dramatic but I do feel passionately about this.

You know, I've lived longer than a lot of the people on here. I'm farther down the road from that major upheaval in my life.

There have been lots of one liners that have been useful in my life. One liners from lots of different places. I just really hate to be deprived of them.

Please give them back to us.

I would consider my sig line to be just as open for editing by the moderators as my posts. If you had a problem w/ my sig line, I would have no issue with you contacting me and asking me to edit it. I would have no problem with having to have a sig line approved before it can be displayed. I would have no problem with having my freedom to use a sig line suspended if I continued to be offensive....of course, what is or is not offensive is highly subjective.