[MtnGoat]

Noting that one poster has adopted a signature line I personally find rather combative and offensive for a site which has eschewed politics, I'm curious what the guidelines are for signature lines.

[Allison]

[Slugman]

If you think jeepasaurusrex's line about environmentalists is so offensive, why don't you tell him in a PM? Seriously, this "signature snobbery" is just too funny coming from a supposed "libertarian". I guess liberty extends only to those he agrees with. Notice he doesn't take offence at signatures lampooning liberals, so his "combative and offensive" reasoning is not very honest. His complaint is purely partisan and one-sided, typical of his complaints in general. No need to guess who he's talking about, either. If the goat has a petty complaint or unfair accusation to make, you can bet I'm the target. After all, this is the guy who said I was a snob because using the word "city" to describe Vancouver confused me as to whether they meant Vancouver BC or Vancouver WA. Honest confusion becomes snobbery to the Goat when it's me who's confused. So his "combative and offensive" needs to be taken with a gigantic grain of salt, especially since he is the combative one most of the time.

[MtnGoat]

It was my impression this was a politics free zone. Apparently, I am mistaken.

[Slugman]

I will change mine the minute I see that mr jeepasaurus has changed his. I find his attack on environmentalists to be in poor taste, and also factually inaccurate. But rather than complain about it, I simply mimicked it to make a point. I notice that point has been taken, as I knew it would once it was turned around the other way.

[MtnGoat]

Not sure what this has to do with jeepasaurus. your assumption i have even seen his sig is part of your problem.

[Allison]

My new sig is directed squarely at you two. Get a room, or at least use the PM function to argue about this.

[MtnGoat]

This is just way, way too much fun!

[jenjen]

Oh fer Pete's sake. I don't think signature lines are aimable at specific people. They're just sort of out there for people to take as they want to. - for the record, my sig line isn't aimed at anybody at all. I just read the line on a flier and liked it.

[Allison]

I am going to state the obvious here: You guys are making yourselves look worse, not your intended targets, with the squabbling and cheap shots in the sigs.

[Slugman]

[jimmymac]

Both sig lines provide a warning label of sorts. Like the "objects are closer than they appear" warning on a convex mirror. I don't see a problem with a sig line that essentially advises a reader that they will need to apply a little extra "correction" to whatever they read.

[Slugman]

Good call, JM. If a person has a particular slant to their ideology, a political signature will help the reader keep the poster's opinions in perspective.

[Tom]

No real guidelines. Sigs are a form of self expression. If someone has a political sig it tells me they are into politics. It also might indicate what way they lean, whether are generally a trash talker or have something of substance to say, etc. If someone has a humorous sig, it tells me they don't take life too seriously. If someone has fruit in their sig it may indicate something about cup size. If a sig is too long, includes a distracting image, etc. you might get a from a moderator but I can't recall ever having to do that. Most people here use reasonable judgement.

[Toonces]

I had been sig-less of late, but y'all inspired me to join in the fun!