Purpose of the signature

[RandallIsland]

Thanks friend.
All is well in the world.

 

[rob nye]

Oh I'm in the wrong for sure.
But I hardly think blue font is morally reprehensible & I sleep pretty well at night despite my 4th line.

I thought the days of MOA board members being above the rules was long gone.

I'm not sure what is more silly. The board debating a .sig policy and making a new "law" or a sitting board member ignoring said policy.

 

[Visian]

I'm not sure what is more silly. The board debating a .sig policy and making a new "law" or a sitting board member ignoring said policy.

i think this thread is more silly than both combined.

from the *last* .sig line bitch-fest, i posted this:

I know I'm supposed to walk away on this...but...my sig line is not giant but neither is it compliant.

it was never intended to be something that you were compliant with or not. it was a *guideline* that gave a general sense of an approach that would suit the interests of most members. three lines, four lines, 200 characters, 250... it really doesn't matter as long as it's not one big "hey look at me" that takes up a lot of page space and makes it difficult to scan the content.

it really is an issue of how much one wants to attract attention to themselves vs. be respectful of other members and accepted practices of legibility.

unfortunately, it got blown up into this big "orwellian" subversion of fundamental individual liberties.

this has, unfortunately, turned a non-issue into just one more example why our forum just ain't quite there. yet.

ian

 

[grossjohann]

Thank you, Ian.

 

[mika]

Ian, what is the role of the Board in the world where the board has arrived? What is your vision of the Promised Land in general? For all the time I spend around here I donÔÇÖt get much of this that is going on, beyond the fact it appeals to my curiosity as to how people organize themselves for various reasons.

 

[Bud]

i think this thread is more silly than both combined.

from the *last* .sig line bitch-fest, i posted this:



it was never intended to be something that you were compliant with or not. it was a *guideline* that gave a general sense of an approach that would suit the interests of most members. three lines, four lines, 200 characters, 250... it really doesn't matter as long as it's not one big "hey look at me" that takes up a lot of page space and makes it difficult to scan the content.

it really is an issue of how much one wants to attract attention to themselves vs. be respectful of other members and accepted practices of legibility.

unfortunately, it got blown up into this big "orwellian" subversion of fundamental individual liberties.

this has, unfortunately, turned a non-issue into just one more example why our forum just ain't quite there. yet.

ian

Ian,

As I did in the last bitch fest thread, I again have to respectfully disagree with your characterization of the policy that was voted on by the BOD and stated as policy here on this very forum under the posting guidelines.







I. User conduct & Posting Policy

Sig lines

As the world changes we are working to adapt the forum to be increasingly useful for members. We've debated various sig line policies and would like to use the one below as an initial experiment. We may modify it in the future depending on how it works out.

Your sig line can contain a maximum of 3 lines, including line spaces, 150 characters and 2 hyperlinks. The text must use the forumÔÇÖs default style text, no embellishment, formatting, photographs or other graphics.

The preferred way to express links are as an URL, however, an embedded link behind text is acceptable if text is reasonable in its content. Hype, trolls and hot-button content, as perceived by our moderators, is not acceptable.

If your sig line contains links to commercial content, clicks from that link will be tracked for the purpose of measuring traffic volume. Please note that links placed in the body of posts are not subject to click-tracking, assuming they contribute valid content that is relevant to the thread and useful to other members. Abuse of this will be addressed as situations arise, and will be at the discretion of the moderators. Please limit your use of links to your personal pursuits only, in other words, no links to 3rd party commercial sites.

While it almost goes without saying, the content of sig lines is also governed by the general site guidelines (so no personal attacks, obscenities, political statements, etc.)


This policy was implemented by programming changes which prevented a new user from having a sig line longer than the policy and requiring any changes to old sig lines to fit the new policy.

Since those who control the forum considered it policy and have stated such. Why you continue to suggest that it was anything else seems to fly in the face of the reality.

It is an issue to me because I believe that if the BOD wants to have policy regarding something, then is should be enforced universally, else change the policy. Unenforced policy leads to the appearance of inconstancy and charges of favoritism. It then calls into question other policies as well.

I was at the BOD meeting when this was voted on and at least on Board member voted against it and her sig line continues to be outside the new policy.

In addition, in the Control Panel, there is an option to not view user sig lines. If one really is so concerned about viewing large sig lines, turn it off. It is really each members choice if they want to see them or not and should not, IMO, be limited.

Other than that, I really couldn't care less.

 

[Visian]

I. User conduct & Posting Policy

Sig lines

As the world changes we are working to adapt the forum to be increasingly useful for members. We've debated various sig line policies and would like to use the one below as an initial experiment. We may modify it in the future depending on how it works out.

you may have missed the point where "guidelines" was used at the very top of the page. i guess it's easy to pick out one word and get a whole ****-storm started. perhaps the moderators can change the word "policies" to "guideline" and a whole lot of panties would get un-knotted?

let's just say i was disappointed how 6 months of effort in making a set of posting guidelines got presented to the board, how certain members of the board chose to respond, and the outcome within our community relative to that choice.

to answer m1ka's question: the forum should be run by the moderators. the moderators should come from the community, and there should be a regular turnover of moderators.

 

[mika]

Thank you, that makes great sense. Though it would eliminate a great deal of my fun watching things like this.

 

[WildBlue]

It is an issue to me because I believe that if the BOD wants to have policy regarding something, then is should be enforced universally, else change the policy. Unenforced policy leads to the appearance of inconstancy and charges of favoritism. It then calls into question other policies as well.

This is my issue. I underlined it for you. It's either policy, or its not. If its policy, then enforce it, board member or not it shouldn't matter.

Enforce it as is. Change it, and enforce it. Or remove it all together.

But by God BE CONSISTENT.

 

[Bud]

you may have missed the point where "guidelines" was used at the very top of the page. i guess it's easy to pick out one word and get a whole ****-storm started. perhaps the moderators can change the word "policies" to "guideline" and a whole lot of panties would get un-knotted?

let's just say i was disappointed how 6 months of effort in making a set of posting guidelines got presented to the board, how certain members of the board chose to respond, and the outcome within our community relative to that choice.

to answer m1ka's question: the forum should be run by the moderators. the moderators should come from the community, and there should be a regular turnover of moderators.

Nope, didn't miss it all.

Didn't miss this either:

While it almost goes without saying, the content of sig lines is also governed by the general site guidelines (so no personal attacks, obscenities, political statements, etc.)

The "also" means guidelines in addition to policy. I don't see how it can be read any other way.

I recognize your frustration at having spent a lot of time and effort on guidelines that became policy, by Board action. It is obvious that it was not your personal intent. But the reality is that the Board intentionally and deliberately made a different decision and this decision was implemented by changes to the forum software.

This could easily have been resolved months ago, but hasn't, and Lee has pointed out, in a different thread, it is a low priority issue for him at this point. It is an issue that has folks with strong feelings on both sides, including both of us.

The Board could also chose to resolve it at any time by rescinding or revising the policy, but at this point they have chosen not to do so. I assume that this is deliberate on their part.

And again, any member can turn off viewing sig lines if they are bothered, offended or otherwise frustrated by seeing sig lines. That seems to me to be the best of both worlds.

Wishing it would go away isn't working.

And not being able to ride gives me too much keyboard time.

PS. I spent most of my working life in a state bureaucracy and became very adept at recognizing words have meaning and intent. Our Policy and Procedure manuals took up 6, two inch, three ring binders. When something was stated a policy, that's exactly what it was and was much more than a suggestion. The procedures implemented that policy. In this case, the procedure was changes to the forum software which implemented the sig line policy.

 

[wuli959]

 

[Bud]

I don't care who you are, that is funny.

 

[Visian]

PS. I spent most of my working life in a state bureaucracy.

why does this not surprise me?

methinks you need to volunteer for something.

 

[rob nye]

Your sig line can contain a maximum of 3 lines, including line spaces, 150 characters and 2 hyperlinks. The text must use the forumÔÇÖs default style text, no embellishment, formatting, photographs or other graphics.

The above looks pretty definitive to me.

They called the 55mph national speed limit an "experiement" too. IIRC they still wrote tickets and collected fines.

At the very least the folks that are conducting the experiment might consider participating.

I mean really, it is a slippery slope when officials decide which of the policies they pass applies to them. Next thing you know we'll have 3,000 gate crashers at the National Rally.

 

[Bud]

why does this not surprise me?

methinks you need to volunteer for something.

I would volunteer to ride but don't have clearance from my DR.

 

[Sue]

Originally Posted by SheRidesABeemer Oh I'm in the wrong for sure.
But I hardly think blue font is morally reprehensible & I sleep pretty well at night despite my 4th line.

I thought the days of MOA board members being above the rules was long gone.

I'm not sure what is more silly. The board debating a .sig policy and making a new "law" or a sitting board member ignoring said policy.

Nicely said, Rob. I was trying to find a way to say the same thing.

 

[Bud]

username,

Have you had enough input?