There was a reason for it. I'm not sure. I think it was because the threads would be a LOT longer, and it's pretty lengthy as is at 50 posts per page (unless there is a way to change it.)
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find the prohibition on signatures quite refreshing. We all have the ability to create a profile that can contain whatever information you might want to put in your signature.
Paizo's one of the cleanest and most easily-read discussion forums on the Internet, and this is one of the many reasons why.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find the prohibition on signatures quite refreshing.
Amen to that.
|
Sigs and avatars lead to the same problem:
DUCKS EVERYWHERE except not ducks
That's super cool on private forums where you can appoint 20 volunteer mods who will take out their life frustrations by hounding any attempts to violate the forum rules, but on a corporate forum, where the only moderators are the people who should be rather spending their time improving website functionality than chasing ASCII penises, it doesn't quite work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
no signatures and black text on white are the two best features about the boards.
please never change that
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I'd say that black text on white is the site's most glaring feature, but I agree that the lack of sigs is quite a welcome difference from other forums.
Black text on a white background is the most readable color combo for most people.
I love signatures, but the lack of them doesn't really bother me.
No signatures please!
Ruyan.
Black text on a white background is the most readable color combo for most people.if you are a person where this is not the case, many (chrome has it std and firefox has aplugin I think) browsers allow you to change black on white to a different color combination
Someone made a thing for this for Firefox but it was annoyingly difficult to set up unless you knew your way pretty well through the system. Trying to change it manually in Firefox's Options gets you black text on black background, sadly.
Any chance you could link to said plugin?
|
it looks like the one I was thinking of stopped being compatible in 2008... looking to see if there is another one
Edit: in firefox: Tools > Options > content tab > colors button > background select Black > text select white > uncheck use system colors > uncheck "allow sites to choose thier own colors, overriding my options above".
This allows black background and white text on the paizo boards
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look at Laithoron profile. He has links to things that change the colors, etc around a lot.
-- david
Papa.dRB
Awesome, thanks Kirstov. Dunno what I was doing wrong earlier but that fixed it.
@PapaDRB: Yep that's the one I was trying to use before, I couldn't get it to work for some reason.
Orthos: FWIW I've found that Stylish™ is easier to setup in Chrome than in Firefox. For some reason, FF seems to disregard the code that changes the colors of multi-line text areas (e.g. such as the ones in which we compose our forum posts).
I wouldn't mind if folks were allowed a one-line text sig (especially for 3PPs advertising their store Websites and the like) but beyond that, I'm glad we don't have them (and am fine with having none at all).
Forums that allow huge pics in signatures I won't even join.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As soon as sigs are allowed every poster with poor impulse control and an axe to grind, whatever axe it may be, is certainly going to make an obnoxious sig that will be around in every drive-by, content-free, possibly-one-word post they may make.
Wow that sounds all soomsayerish typed out like that.
I don't mind signatures as long as there's an option to turn them off (which is usually pretty common).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't mind signatures as long as there's an option to turn them off, along with any random replies to trollish ones (which is theoretically impossible). So in reality, even if I turned off sigs and got a magical app to hide posts by monk_hijacker_98 (who I just made up), I'd still be seeing replies to his sig in EVERY SINGLE THREAD. So in other words, oh dear gods, please no.
As soon as sigs are allowed every poster with poor impulse control and an axe to grind, whatever axe it may be, is certainly going to make an obnoxious sig that will be around in every drive-by, content-free, possibly-one-word post they may make.
Wow that sounds all soomsayerish typed out like that.
While that is a good point, I've been in forums where you could report an inappropriate sig to the mods like you could report an inappropriate post. The troll sigs were gotten rid of pretty quickly.
Given how lax the moderation is here though (compared to other places I've been) I don't know if they'd want to take that on.
Prolly is better not to have them, I was just thinking it'd be a decent compromise for people who do have legit reasons to want sigs.
soomsayerishwut
Mikaze is half doomsayer and half soothsayer.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I have to admit the new features added during the downtime have grown on me despite my misgivings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------
Mikze - JOIN MY STEAM GROUP NAO Facebook | MySpace | Gaia Online | Twitter | Tumblr | Newgrounds | Alcoholics Anonymous
<kirby dance!> (>'_')> <('_')> <('_'<) <kirby dance!>
"Something something politics religion game design something something." - Mikaze (favorite this post if you agree!)