[2019-01-02] A quick reminder about signatures

117 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

sb56637
sb56637's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 01/08/2010 - 09:29
Posts: 6282
Location: The Light
[2019-01-02] A quick reminder about signatures

Hi everyone,

Hope you’re all doing well. Just a quick reminder about signatures— I receive PMs fairly frequently from different members that are annoyed or even offended by the content of some users’ signatures. This is usually due to signatures that are oversized, or because they contain political / religious messages. So if you have a signature, please review it (your own signature please, not those of other users) and make sure it adheres to the following BLF Rules, and modify it if necessary:

BLF Rules wrote:
  1. Please don’t be rude. Rude people will have their accounts deleted.
  2. Please don’t use dirty language, please don’t swear, and please avoid lewd or risqué conversations.
  3. Please avoid controversial or divisive subjects such as religion and politics.

That’s all. Thanks a lot for reading, and have fun!

Budget Light Forum ...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

Edited by: sb56637 on 01/02/2019 - 23:48
ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 29 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 8474
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3

+1

If saying a thing once would break the rules, saying it in every post doesn’t make it any better.

It’s like, if one is told not to swear, and one reacts by wearing a hat covered in profanity, this does not improve relations with other people. It mostly just inspires eyerolls and facepalms, and acts as a warning sign to others.

sb56637
sb56637's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 01/08/2010 - 09:29
Posts: 6282
Location: The Light
ToyKeeper wrote:
If saying a thing once would break the rules, saying it in every post doesn’t make it any better.

^ You should win a Nobel peace prize for this simple morsel of wisdom. Big Smile

Budget Light Forum ...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 44 sec ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 1031
Location: US

Testing out my new signature..

 


Edited by: sb56637

 

sb56637
sb56637's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 01/08/2010 - 09:29
Posts: 6282
Location: The Light

contactcr wrote:

Edited by: sb56637

 

Nice one! You should totally use that for your sig. Smile

Budget Light Forum ...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

Yokiamy
Yokiamy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 10/18/2016 - 15:47
Posts: 1248
Location: Netherlands

I have to admit, my sig is quite large, i will review it

Edited by: sb56637

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

shrugs..

2Q19

Bob_McBob
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 13 min ago
Joined: 08/14/2016 - 04:53
Posts: 339
Location: Canada

I would strongly support a character or line limit for signatures. There are some prominent forum members who have obnoxiously large signatures full of images that are extremely distracting when reading threads, and I sincerely doubt they will remove them without moderator intervention. I also welcome the rules limiting political and religious topics. I don’t need bible quotes and gun ownership activism constantly in my face on a flashlight forum.

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 7781
Location: California

Thank you SB.

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.

2Q19

Ozythemandias
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 09/21/2016 - 08:33
Posts: 262

What is the policy on sigs containing dog whistles such as a single letter from the alphabet?

MtnDon
MtnDon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 08/27/2015 - 18:25
Posts: 2173
Location: Expatriate Canadian in New Mexico, USA

Signature? What signature? Smile

lampliter
lampliter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 15 hours ago
Joined: 07/31/2017 - 16:06
Posts: 62
Location: Paradise

This post inspired me to add a sig to my posts; violating the law of Aristotle.

The only way to not receive any criticism is to; Say nothing, do nothing, be nothing, know nothing.---Aristotle.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 2 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 226
Location: MN

Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.

There’s a time and place for everything. This is a place for discussing flashlights, not plastering religious or political statements everywhere.

I think even having a thread/section devoted to discussions would be a poor choice, on the internet discussions like that rarely stay civil except in the most homogeneous communities.

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 6649
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


The slippery slope is real. I’m not happy with this rule. It’s too heavy handed. Perhaps a better option would be to make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures at all, like the button that allows members to see a home page sans commercial posts.

Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.
-Ayn Rand

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

@BurningPlayd0h:

But a signature is not a discussion.

Of course, if a signature attacks or flames people, it’s not acceptable.
Not sure what religious signature on BLF causes some people to get their panties in a twist, i only know of 1 religious (or rather theological) signature and it attacks or flames nobody.

Don’t you mind someone calling himself satan here? There’s at least 1 account with that name.

As for the gun control signature some of you may have in mind, it does not attack or flame people either.
(It’s not untrue either and it’s part of the US Constitution (and for good reasons), but that’s not important right now. Wink )

Get over it. People disagree about many things.

2Q19

Ozythemandias
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 09/21/2016 - 08:33
Posts: 262

DavidEF wrote:
Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


The slippery slope is real. I’m not happy with this rule. It’s too heavy handed. Perhaps a better option would be to make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures at all, like the button that allows members to see a home page sans commercial posts.

Man this whole site has too many rules! Overbearing moderation and such! Lets go start our own forum. We can call it economylightforum.com or something

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 6649
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

Ozythemandias wrote:
DavidEF wrote:
Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


The slippery slope is real. I’m not happy with this rule. It’s too heavy handed. Perhaps a better option would be to make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures at all, like the button that allows members to see a home page sans commercial posts.

Man this whole site has too many rules! Overbearing moderation and such! Lets go start our own forum. We can call it economylightforum.com or something


You laugh, but that’s exactly why a few of the flashlight forums got their start, including THIS one, IIRC.

Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.
-Ayn Rand

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 44 sec ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 1031
Location: US

How do you find the time to be offended about these things when we have members who prefer 6000K tints w/ micro-usb charging built in? I can barely sleep at night knowing I share an online space with these members.

CRX
CRX's picture
Offline
Last seen: 28 min 9 sec ago
Joined: 04/02/2013 - 15:27
Posts: 3129
Location: Scotland

Dont you dis integrated USB charging man. Big Smile

-X3-
-X3-'s picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 16 sec ago
Joined: 07/16/2014 - 03:28
Posts: 2390
Location: France, Angers

Bob_McBob wrote:
I would strongly support a character or line limit for signatures. There are some prominent forum members who have obnoxiously large signatures full of images that are extremely distracting when reading threads, and I sincerely doubt they will remove them without moderator intervention. I also welcome the rules limiting political and religious topics. I don’t need bible quotes and gun ownership activism constantly in my face on a flashlight forum.

Don’t you know that Internet is ruled by the Freedom Country ? Bible quotes are universal man, get over it or they’ll teach you to run faster than bullets !
Yeehaw !

"-X3-, is there any place in your house without a flashlight ?" 

My Flashlight public album (mods, emitter swaps, eye candy)

My reviews channel (French language, Olight, Thorfire, Sofirn, Lumintop : 60+ lights tested)

My personal channel (including Olight SR mini, S1, S2, S1A and S-mini disassembly)

M4DM4X blog, saves you $$$ 

Adhara
Online
Last seen: 8 min 2 sec ago
Joined: 05/17/2018 - 01:57
Posts: 66
Location: Usa

Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


I find that offensive. Evil
hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 7781
Location: California
Quote:
make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures

That’s already been made available. You know how to find this stuff. You just need to know the magic word: “uncluttering”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-ab&q=site%3Abudgetlight...

http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/965782#comment-965782

That’s rather like one of the high points of the Usenet pre-WWW, the “killfile” — a tool that made it it the responsibility of the irritated to choose not to see whatever set them off.

“Doctor, I can’t help but flame when I see X”
“Then stop seeing X”

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

DavidEF wrote:
Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


The slippery slope is real. I’m not happy with this rule. It’s too heavy handed.
Not yet.
SB requests us to take note of the rules and decide ourselves.
Quote:
Perhaps a better option would be to make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures at all, like the button that allows members to see a home page sans commercial posts.
Hmmm.. That could be handy for when you’re on a smart phone too.
Save some much needed screen space.

I’m not sure which signatures on BLF trigger the ‘offended’.
But as long as they’re not attacking or flaming people, i don’t think it’s justified to deem it inappropriate.
But then still, there are limits to what is acceptable.
Quoting John 3:16 would be over the limit i.m.o., because it can be taken as implying judgement over a large group of people (rather than salvation of a not so large group of people (although interpretations vary about the ultimate size of that group of people)
Quoting a bit of Biblical theology about Christ being the Light (and the darkness not comprehending it (depending on the translation)) does no such thing.

Your signature, Dave, can be considered problematic too by today’s ‘feelings over facts’ standards.

My posts here in this topic can be considered problematic too, i guess…
Crazy times.

Someone said:
“1984 (the book by George Orwell) is not a warning, it’s a manual.”

2Q19

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

Adhara wrote:
Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


I find that offensive. Evil
Facepalm

Silly

2Q19

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

X3 wrote:
Bob_McBob wrote:
I would strongly support a character or line limit for signatures. There are some prominent forum members who have obnoxiously large signatures full of images that are extremely distracting when reading threads, and I sincerely doubt they will remove them without moderator intervention. I also welcome the rules limiting political and religious topics. I don’t need bible quotes and gun ownership activism constantly in my face on a flashlight forum.

Don’t you know that Internet is ruled by the Freedom Country ? Bible quotes are universal man, get over it or they’ll teach you to run faster than bullets !
Yeehaw !
Now you are flaming Christians.

2Q19

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

DavidEF wrote:
Ozythemandias wrote:
DavidEF wrote:
Jerommel wrote:
Yeah, let the offence takers rule the internet…

No, let’s not do that.
At least, not here too.


The slippery slope is real. I’m not happy with this rule. It’s too heavy handed. Perhaps a better option would be to make it possible for the ‘offended’ to simply NOT SEE signatures at all, like the button that allows members to see a home page sans commercial posts.

Man this whole site has too many rules! Overbearing moderation and such! Lets go start our own forum. We can call it economylightforum.com or something


You laugh, but that’s exactly why a few of the flashlight forums got their start, including THIS one, IIRC.

I think BLF is still very ‘free’.
Self regulating too.
But the PC police censoring trend of today may threaten that freedom, so we discuss it.

Or has there been an increase in problematic signatures?

2Q19

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 6747
Location: nyc

Wellp, let’s face it. There’ll always be someone who’ll find some way to be offended by anything. The “South Park” episode about a completely non-offensive all-inclusive Christmas Holiday all-inclusive non-denominational season play was a good exposé of such a thing.

A real-life example about “safe spaces” and “safe-learning” in universities was how intolerance was absolutely verboten. Someone who was a rather devout Christian had no personal hatred towards homosexuals, but was of the belief that it was a sin. “Hate the sin, but love the sinner”, and all that. Yet in class, he was absolutely terrified to even make mention of his beliefs, for fear of being sanctioned for various’n‘sundry “hate crimes”. (And me personally, you couldn’t pay me to care any less whether someone sticks tab A into slot B or anything else, so don’t even start.)

Or people on campus who were forced to remove or at least cover up pro-Trump teeshirts a few years ago. Yet no one else with political slogans was told to do similarly. (Similarly, I’m apolitical, and think they’re all just flip-sides of the same statist coin, so don’t start.)

Hell, someone with the .signature of a simple “Jesus loves you!” could cause someone offense somehow. I work in a neighborhood with a pretty large Jewish contingent, went to a tailor, he wished me a Happy Hannukkah, and did I take offense, stress a Merry Christmas at him, or an “inclusive” Happy Holidays at him? No, of course not. Wished him a Happy Hannukkah right back and that was it, we both went away happy.

So any’n‘all Professional Victims out there will find something to piss’n‘moan about, no matter what your intent.

And, oh man, speaking of which, a few years back I had a discussion with got lectured at by a SJW, who went into everything from “microaggressions” to “white privilege”, and basically accusing me of being a racist just because I have white skin. Talk about “guilty until prov—… well, forever”.

So yeah, I agree with the whole “slippery slope” thing. Let things be handled on a case by case basis if need be, and just like the old “Rude!” buttons, let there be discretion, because you know some snowflake is going to flag something for whatever reason, no matter how inane.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 1767
Location: Southeast, PA

Gotta find the Popcorn in this cabinet, this is going to a good night on the ol’ BLF Smile

23-54

klrman
klrman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 9 min ago
Joined: 11/07/2016 - 22:44
Posts: 1981
Location: Canada

I'm offended at being offended   Seriously, I'm guessing there are about 3-4 members around here that get offended at just about anything/everything and possibly even at themselves too and hit the report button every chance they get. 

Jerommel
Jerommel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 13:18
Posts: 5724
Location: the Hague, Netherlands

2Q19

Pages

Topic locked