Originally Posted by
goalie
Yes, turning off signatures is not a solution but that's not what I was alluding to but rather as a stop-gap measure until a review of signatures could be done and as I also said, it's a b!tch of a project but if there is a signature review committee, then they should review.
What are you meaning a 'review of signatures'? We've kind of been there, done that and arrived at the current policy. And had it tweaked once it went operational to remove the english language requirement. And now, the TOS group will have the opportunity to review again.
I know - having served on the sigcom - that many, many members enjoy their signatures. To hear someone who is elected to represent us even suggest that they should be forcibly turned off across the board - well, I think anyone voting for that would find themselves unelectable at the next election. This would make the OMNI storms seems like teacups! It would certainly raise the visbility of TB, but not in a good way.
Can I just remind you - you are elected to represent us. Nowhere, did I vote for any of you to vote to turn off a feature I, and many others, make use of and enjoy on FT, because a few people don't like it. The needs of the many, not the needs of the few whiners?
How many people have complained about this? How many people have signatures - you don't think depriving those of us who use sigs of them to satisfy the complainers - who don't need to view sigs themselves if they find them so distasteful - is a bit of a hammer to crack a nut?
You are our reprsentatives, not our controllers
Please remember that you represent more than the very small number of people complaining here about sigs - you are also supposed to represent the silent majority, a very large number of which have signatures.