2/7/14 TC Signature TeaDay

[Chip]

Welcome TeaChatters to a different Signature edition of TeaDay.

A few weeks ago I told you to stay tuned for "Signature Week" coming up on TeaDay. Well, finally it has arrived.

Many moons ago on TeaChat, "Signatures" were enabled and appeared at the end of every member post who added a Signature to their TeaChat profile. It was interesting until it totally got out of hand with 'spam-like' Signatures and worse ... images that repeated over and over again. Oh my ... the images!!!

At the time, we had begun tightening restrictions in order to reign in the spammers who had run amok on TeaChat, but spammers quickly figured out how to sneak one by us via Signatures. And clever bloggers were posting silly one liner or even one word posts in order to repeat their links that appeared in their Signatures ... a good way to beat the forum rules on self promoting posts and links!

Also, at the time in an extremely rare and full agreement between the then second mod and myself, we did not like how the Signatures disrupted the fluidity of the forum pages with repeating Signatures over and over again ... sans Signatures, the forum pages were noticeably cleaner looking and easier reading.

So here is your chance, add a Signature in your profile if you have not already done so. It will appear at the bottom of all your posts. I will enable this for a one week(ish) trial period, and ask for member feedback here. Depending upon member feedback, the Signature may return for a longer period, provided everyone stays civil.

It goes w/o saying, but say I will ... Any Signature that abuses the general forum rules on obscenity, politics, religion, etc. of ANY kind will be removed. These are not permitted on TeaChat which is an oasis from such discussions, etc.. There are other forums and venues on the internet for these things. Also, the member will lose the ability to add a Signature.

Remember to vote, and you can change your vote during this period.

[AdamMY]

Testing. I figure more rules regarding them would be harder to police and address, but at the same time signatures a notoriously known for becoming spammy in the way mentioned.

[Chip]

Irony, Signatures are not displaying on my end even after enabling.

[EDIT: ohhh, only new posts since enabling show the Signature]

[sherubtse]

Thanks for enabling this feature, Chip! I belong to several other tea-related forums and mailing lists. All of them have sigs enabled for members, and none (to the best of my knowlegde) have had any problems with spammers.

[Chip]

Thanks for enabling this feature, Chip! I belong to several other tea-related forums and mailing lists. All of them have sigs enabled for members, and none (to the best of my knowlegde) have had any problems with spammers.

2006 til a few years ago ... things were quite different then. It seemed that spammers were always trying to stay one step ahead of our efforts to thwart them. They were extremely aggressive and persistent to say the least.

There was a time when it was not unusual to have 20 or more spam posts a day. The ownership did not really want to do anything that would take away the instant gratification of joining and posting ... I started sending them the garbage that was being posted on their forum. They got the picture (often literally).

We have done a lot on the front end to reduce "spammage." So, spam is rarely an issue anymore. And spammers change with the times seemingly.
The Signature was just one way spammers would get their links, etc. on the forum. Even if the Signature was to remain beyond this trial period, I will likely remove the ability to post urls and images.

[William]

Voted nay. Honestly, I really do not see the utility to have them.

[Chip]

Testing. I figure more rules regarding them would be harder to police and address, but at the same time signatures a notoriously known for becoming spammy in the way mentioned.

This has been my experience, and I have noticed it on large forums. At around 1/4 million posts, TeaChat is still relatively small, but is still targeted. I can imagine the larger forums require constant policing.

Signatures would definitely require a higher degree of watching as offenders tend to sneak these in after the fact. So, I may have reviewed all posts, and a spammer could go back in and add. So, members can send a report to me by hitting the "!" icon above the suspected post.

[Devoted135]

I don't mind them as long as they are relatively unobtrusive. One or two lines, and preferably a smaller default font size than the actual post. Testing here...

Edit: Okay, that's too big. How can I make that MUCH smaller?
Edit again: Alright, that's better. If anyone is interested, I made the font "smaller" and then adjusted the font size to 75.

[Chip]

Voted nay. Honestly, I really do not see the utility to have them.

IMHO, they are a distraction when reading through the forums. W/O them, you do not have to "edit" out the Signatures when reading post after post. They are sort of like speed bumps.

But I am willing to listen to opposing PoVs.

[Chip]

I don't mind them as long as they are relatively unobtrusive. One or two lines, and preferably a smaller default font size than the actual post. Testing here...

Edit: Okay, that's too big. How can I make that MUCH smaller?
Edit again: Alright, that's better though I would prefer just one line instead of two. Haha, I suppose that's up to me!

Bilbo-isms are permitted

I actually just changed mine to green in order to illustrate somewhat what you said. A small font is a good idea, with no color. The eye can then more easily breeze by (ignore if so desired) it as it distinguishes the smaller font ... maybe.

[Chip]

Interesting, one can choose not to attach a Signature to a particular post.

I have ignored Signature related ... things ... for so long, that I forgot a lot of things you can do, plus phpbb has added/changed a lot of features related to Signatures.

[Devoted135]

I don't mind them as long as they are relatively unobtrusive. One or two lines, and preferably a smaller default font size than the actual post. Testing here...

Edit: Okay, that's too big. How can I make that MUCH smaller?
Edit again: Alright, that's better though I would prefer just one line instead of two. Haha, I suppose that's up to me!

Bilbo-isms are permitted

Haha, yay!

I actually just changed mine to green in order to illustrate somewhat what you said. A small font is a good idea, with no color. The eye can then more easily breeze by (ignore if so desired) it as it distinguishes the smaller font ... maybe.

It's unfortunate that the default is so giant and obtrusive, because many posters may not notice or take the time to customize it. That's why I voted "other", because my preference really depends on how they are used.

[Chip]

It's unfortunate that the default is so giant and obtrusive, because many posters may not notice or take the time to customize it. That's why I voted "other", because my preference really depends on how they are used.

I will have to look later and see if the Signature default can be independently changed from the rest of the forum.

[茶藝-TeaArt08]

While I could be fine with the signatures existing...I definitely prefer the look and feel of the forum without them. I am not yet finding how the signatures really contribute anything to the space; they seem rather superfluous to me. I voted "no" but I am open to where the group goes with it.

Blessings!

[debunix]

Nay. We can already personalize with our images, and anyone who is moved to add a quote to a particular post is welcome to do so, but I prefer not to add extra scrolling for the same message over and over again, especially when I am accessing TC via my phone.

Enjoying some thermos-brewed Lao Cha Tou puerh from Norbu today, a mellow sweet plummy always-favorite of the office tea gang.