Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Signatures are stupid

Topic Closed

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Signatures are stupid (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Signatures are stupid

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 10-08-2004 06:43 PM

To quote Joe Redifer's signature

quote:
Signatures are stupid. Do you really want to read the same "witty" comment after each and every one of my posts? If so, why? Are you that forgetful that by the time my next post rolls around it will seem original and funny again? Maybe you are. You probably have zero short term memory. And thus with my very next post you will read this all again, even if my next post is just me replying to myself because nobody else will. OK OK... it would be really stupid and egotistical of me to think that whatever I put in my signature will be fresh and original more than once. As everyone knows, I am quite modest and would never think anything negative about anyone else, especially lovable souls like Jack Valenti who are only trying to make the world a better place for you and me! So why must I thrust this paragraph on you each time I post? Is what I am saying right now that damned great and important that you need to read it again and again and again? Will my comments here become completely useless once people read them once and then skip over them in every subsequent post I ever make? If so, then what is the point of me doing this in the first place? Or what if I am making a post about something, and the signature is in the completely opposite tone of my post, thus breaking the mood of the reader and rendering my comments useless. What the hell am I supposed to do then? Who knows. The only thing that matters is that this signature is on every post I make, because you need to see it and you need to see it often! It helps me express my individuality since obviously member pics could never do that. But hell, signatures can! Hooray signatures!

Really, signatures ARE stupid and a couple of them are starting to create some problems. Of course every time I email a member about something they have typed that is generating legitimate complaints, they flip out. So screw it. I have turned them off. We can do without them for awhile, or perhaps forever. Send in a member picture instead.

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-08-2004 06:54 PM

***FINALLY***!!!!

I agree....

Kudos to you Grand-Poo-BAH for having the courage to turn off this Film-Tech "feature". Hopefully it's permanent!

I credit Joe. Joe has killed it for all of us by his ridiculously long sig. (And small penis...)

All is right with FT.

>>> Phil

| IP: Logged

Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-08-2004 07:17 PM

I admit I've never really liked signatures and have seldom put them on email messages. I don't believe I've ever setup a system to automatically put one on email for me. It's funny now that sigs are turned off -- I can't even remember if I had one that appeared on my posts. If I did, it probably was a link to my web site.

I found that I never read the sigs anyway and automatically ignored them after seeing them for a short while.

| IP: Logged

Greg Davis
Film Handler

Posts: 96
From: Vista, Ca, USA
Registered: Sep 2004

posted 10-08-2004 08:07 PM

Your not your job. Your not your car. Your not your kakhis. You are the all seeing all knowing scum of the world. You are not special. You are a space monkey.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 10-08-2004 08:16 PM

You're not very good with grammar. [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 10-08-2004 08:19 PM

And Brad can't spell. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Brian Michael Weidemann
Expert cat molester

Posts: 944
From: Costa Mesa, CA United States
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 10-08-2004 08:32 PM

No signatures? Now I have no way to distinguish myself! [Razz]

I know I haven't been here that long, compared to many, but I don't recall seeing anyone's signature that was in any way offensive, at least not enough to elicit complaints from other members. At least not enough to elicit a complaint from ME. Perhaps I am just mature enough not to think too much about what other random people's signatures say.

I didn't realize this was such a problem. I mean, I learned after reading it once to ignore Joe's ramble. I eventually ignore everyone's! I like the fun, little aspect of customizing they allow, but I've never made them in any way important.

Although, the sense of signature usage here is much better than some OTHER forums. Yeah, let's put a huge 500x200 animated GIF in our signatures and quote the entire Constitutional Peasant scene from Holy Grail, with lots of smileys and dashes ... and have it on every single post, even though the only replies I type are "I agree, IMHO, so-and-so is so stupid. LOL, etc."

No real need for them here, especially since you've got a contact and website button in the header of every post anyway! I won't say "good riddance," but I won't miss them too terribly either.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 10-08-2004 09:47 PM

quote: Phil Hill
I credit Joe. Joe has killed it for all of us by his ridiculously long sig. (And small penis...)

Huh? Leave my amazingly microscopic penis out of it! You promised you wouldn't tell! [Smile]

quote: Greg Davis
Your not your job. Your not your car. Your not your kakhis. You are the all seeing all knowing scum of the world. You are not special. You are a space monkey.

What are you talking about? Did you remember your meds?

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-08-2004 10:11 PM

Signatures are quite easy to ignore and I'm AMAZED that anyone took offense to any of them...even the absurdly long ones....talk about your page-inflation per subject!

Film-Tech is the only place where I have a "signature" though on my work emails, I have the standard contact info in my emails.

I guess now I'll have to type the sig line for each post...now what was it?

SIGNATURE DELETED

[ 10-09-2004, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]

| IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 10-08-2004 10:19 PM

Greg, is this what you are trying to say?

You are not your job, your car or your khakis. You are the all-seeing, all-knowing scum of the world. You are not special; you are a space monkey.

Sounds vaguely like the old National Lampoon parody of Desiderata, Deteriorata.

quote:
With all its hopes, dreams, promises and urban renewal
The world continues to deteriorate.

GIVE UP!

You are a fluke
Of the universe.
You have no right to be here.
And whether you can hear it or not
The universe is laughing behind your back.

Oh, and Brad, thanks for getting rid of the sigs...they were really getting annoying.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 10-08-2004 10:51 PM

Well thank God...er...I mean me...that I am Butt God otherwise without my sig you would never know I walk amongst you.

| IP: Logged

Erick Akers
Arse Kicker

Posts: 201
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: May 2001

posted 10-08-2004 10:59 PM

I've been here for quite a while, and I have never had a signature, but I have never been offended by one either.

As we constantly are loosing our freedoms, why in the name of whomever would someone be offended by just a silly signature.

Who's sig was so offensive to come to this conclusion or was this the ultimate goal of Joe's extended signature rant.

Or was Joe the actual offender???

Do we really have to cow down to every ones Political Correctness?

If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything!!!

Brad,

I know it's your site, but not to include the opinions of your membership before closing this feature of silly free expression, just seems like a wussy way out to me. [Confused]

"The needs of many out weigh the needs of the few!"

Who were the precious few that were offended anyway? [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 10-08-2004 11:59 PM

"Needs"? Sigs are just clutter. Nothing more. I can't see anyone actually needing them. I am amazed that anyone really cares that they were turned off.

| IP: Logged

Nate Lehrke
Master Film Handler

Posts: 396
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-09-2004 12:38 AM

I like the non signature style now. It streamlines the posts & makes topics roll more effectively.

Though I do think that Joe should just change his name to that ever so long sig, just so he can inflict his torture on us every post.

------
I could always just add a fake signature everytime I make a post. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 10-09-2004 01:29 AM

MEMBERS MANUALLY TYPING IN SIGNATURES AT THE END OF THEIR POSTS WILL BE BANNED!

Really how pathetic is this? Nothing is more rude than when people intentionally try and work their way around the rules.

I have never liked signatures. I almost did not permit them in the beginning. The only signature on this board that truly served a purpose was John Pytlak's, but he is probably the easiest person ever to contact, so even the loss of his is no big loss.

Before everyone starts pointing fingers and trying to guess as to "who's fault" this was, no one person is responsible for the removal of signatures. Life will go on, and it will be better now that the extra clutter is gone.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.