Poll: Let's vote!

[fix-the-spade]

No, absolutely not.

You already have the options to use them on Warcry, but they add useless data to the page. I read the forums for discussions and as an outlet for my massive overload of opinions. Signatures don't add anything, they're just clutter.

I fail to see how Escapist's forums (or any other forum) would be improved by having to scroll through several hundred platitudes before you can read the actual responses.

 

[hotacidbath]

If it was text only and held to a minimum amount of characters then maybe, but otherwise no.

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

No they just serve to over-clutter the forum with pointless crap, I don't care what "witty quote" you have there or what oversized picture of some cartoon animal/videogame character you adore and nor does anyone else but you.

Ninja'd. I want to read people's posts, not their signatures. Repeatedly.

 

[Woem]

I don't really care, as long as there's an option to not view them. I always disable signatures on a forum.

 

[Ph33nix]

NOO GOD NO THAT JUST MAKES FORUMS A PAIN IN THE ARSE TO READ.

 

[Murlin]

I'd like it, but I don't have a cool sig so I don't care if we don't get signatures.

 

[Nomad]

Signatures rarely contain actual signatures. And like someone said... When they do, it's sort of pointless since our usernames are right there to the left. I actually like that the Escapist doesn't have them, it puts more focus on the actual discussions.

 

[Spitfire175]

Although there would need to be limits on size/length/colours/pictures to stop people taking it too far.

This point is a very important one. Massive signeratures mess up the forums and are annoying.

 

[Nazulu]

Nah, I don't see any point in having them now. I wouldn't mind though if there was a way so you don't have to load them at all but i just don't see any point.

I haven't voted yet just in case someone wants to tell me a good reason for them.

 

[rokkolpo]

you mean the same as deviantart?

EDIT:why not make signitures in your profile page?
there it won't annoy anyone.

 

[The Hairminator]

They more or less take attention away from posts, and that I'm against.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'd allow sigs, if the twitter rule is applied.

140 characters, text only.

I don't really care tho, so thinking about it I'd probably abstain.

I'd vote against if there weren't good tight rules on sigs however.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Some high horse once said that The Escapist will never have signatures which is a good thing because sometimes they put in a huge picture which takes ages to load for some people and is most of the time three or four times as big as the post itself.

Edit: Although I'd like to have my typical Lucky Star picture down there.

This. My computer has been running slower then ever on this site (And this site alone) and the last thing I need is a huge picture that will take forever to load.

 

[fulano]

Something that has less than 200 characters I'd be okay with. More, not so much.

 

[sebar nl]

I was agreeing with you that on this site they probably are not worth having, I don't think that counts as arguing.

If you mean the ones where you can edit it in your profile and it comes up at the bottom of all of your posts then yes, I think it would be a nice addition.

Although there would need to be limits on size/length/colours/pictures to stop people taking it too far.

Is that so?

Are you trying to start an argument?

'cause he IS that good.