I seem to recall Dr_Zoidberg having to remove a quote (from a Forumosan) from his signature. Why do I now see a number of other posters using quotes (from Forumosans) in theirs?
And why is bobpine, so adamant that Dr_Zoidberg remove his quote, silent on this issue?
I think it depends on the nature of the quote, AFAIK. What are your intentions when using the quote in your sig? Quoted wisdom is ok, but I think using your signature function to put down, embarass or otherwise treat other users in a way contrary to the spirit of the site or its rules is not ok. Ask yourself if the quote that you were compelled to remove in the past has a place on a friendly expat social chat forum. If others are abusing their signature function, contact an admin and ask that it be removed.
That’s about right.
That wasn’t how it was presented to Dr_Zoidberg.
How was it presented if I may ask?
Maybe you would like to tell us what the problem is instead of ranting about how a poster who doesn’t post anymore was treated.
It was presented this way:
I (that is to say, bobepine) don’t like the fact you have a quote in your signature.
Get rid of it (from the powers that be).
And in case anyone is wondering, no, the quote had absolutely nothing to do with bobepine.
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
The problem is one person is told to get rid of a quote in his signature. A few months later, quotes in signatures suddenly appear without a peep from anyone. Are the rules the rules, or are they only the rules in certain instances, and if so, which ones?
I think you should put your old quote back. “Viva le revelution!”
This isn’t the post you’re looking for…
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
[/quote]
Don’t be a bitch!
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
The problem is one person is told to get rid of a quote in his signature. A few months later, quotes in signatures suddenly appear without a peep from anyone. Are the rules the rules, or are they only the rules in certain instances, and if so, which ones?[/quote]
Da Rules: A revisit.
Rule ONE: The following set of rules are inconsistent both in their description and in their application. They are applied liberally in some forums and by some moderators, and more ardently in some darker corners.
Rule TWO: Some posters have more rights than others. ‘Rights’ are peculiar and obtaining them is never an easy path. Rather like the Taiwanese status thing. It’s real, it’s there, but no-one talks about it.
Rule THREE: Rule two is a secret. Even longer term members question the ‘truth’ behind rule two.
Rule FOUR: Anyone who challenges the rules will be swiftly shat upon.
Rule FIVE: These rules are subject to change.
Rule SIX: Respect the wishes of the moderators and the administration, no matter how nutty or insane their opinions and decisions may well be.
Maoman, you have a fab site, but the bickering about the enforcement of rules has failed to stop in the last 3 years. Thats over 1000 days of moaning. Kill the rules. Please? Just for a likkle while at least…
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
The problem is one person is told to get rid of a quote in his signature. A few months later, quotes in signatures suddenly appear without a peep from anyone. Are the rules the rules, or are they only the rules in certain instances, and if so, which ones?[/quote]
Da Rules: A revisit.
Rule ONE: The following set of rules are inconsistent both in their description and in their application. They are applied liberally in some forums and by some moderators, and more ardently in some darker corners.
Rule TWO: Some posters have more rights than others. ‘Rights’ are peculiar and obtaining them is never an easy path. Rather like the Taiwanese status thing. It’s real, it’s there, but no-one talks about it.
Rule THREE: Rule two is a secret. Even longer term members question the ‘truth’ behind rule two.
Rule FOUR: Anyone who challenges the rules will be swiftly shat upon.
Rule FIVE: These rules are subject to change.
Rule SIX: Respect the wishes of the moderators and the administration, no matter how nutty or insane their opinions and decisions may well be.
Maoman, you have a fab site, but the bickering about the enforcement of rules has failed to stop in the last 3 years. Thats over 1000 days of moaning. Kill the rules. Please? Just for a likkle while at least…[/quote]
I think the bickering over application of rules occurs because users are ALLOWED to bicker about them. This site is very open to feedback about its moderating and, indeed, selects moderators from the ranks of regular users. The buck stops with the owners, true, but many sites I’ve frequented take a much different approach to moderating and criticisms thereof. They have rules and, when they are broken, posts get deleted with no discussion whatsoever. Posts critical of moderators, moderating decisions and admin have a way of disappearing on many sites.
But this is beyond a virtual community. I can go to Carnegie’s, call Sandman a c£nt to his face (it happened often enough), and everyone around me can deal with it. I get home, say the same thing, to almost the same people, but this time I write it down, and one of that very same group will smack my ass for writing such a thing. Social police?
But do you say that kind of thing to the 300 pound behemoth-- who you don’t know, is rumoured to have a short fuse and has arms thicker than your thighs? Do you say such things to strangers who haven’t harmed you IRL? If you say something facetiously to a friend in person, the intent is clear. If you insult strangers online, the effect is totally different. The rules exist so that the maximum number of people may enjoy this site–including those who have no clue who Sandman is IRL.
This is missing the point. The rule isn’t that you must never, under any circumstances, quote another 'mosan in your signature line. The point is that you can’t abuse the function in order to attack another user. When you quote someone, ask yourself why you are doing so. If your intentions are malicious, to humiliate and so forth, chances are your action will be breaking a rule and you may be asked to remove the quote. Do members quote each other? Probably. If someone’s quote of another users words bothers you, ask admin to remove it.
And that is probably one of the best reasons why NOT to allow this site to be a shit fest.
He still posts.
Dr_Zoidberg IS Taichung Social Club.
Talking about himself using 3rd person tense makes it a bit confusing though.
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
[/quote]
Don’t be a bitch![/quote]
This thread wasn’t meant to be a bitchfest, and it wasn’t a rant. Dr_Zoidberg believed quoting others in the signature was verboten, but now others are doing it. I was simply asking for clarification.
If people have nothing constructive to add to the discussion then they can :stfu:
Did you forget how to read, or have you been in Taiwan so long you no longer understand English?
[/quote]
Don’t be a bitch![/quote]
This thread wasn’t meant to be a bitchfest, and it wasn’t a rant. Dr_Zoidberg believed quoting others in the signature was verboten, but now others are doing it. I was simply asking for clarification.
If people have nothing constructive to add to the discussion then they can :stfu:[/quote]
Consider me stuffed, big boy! 
On the ‘understanding English’ front, how’s your reading list thread expanding?
[quote=“Josefus”]He still posts.Dr_Zoidberg IS Taichung Social Club.
Talking about himself using 3rd person tense makes it a bit confusing though.[/quote]
I think they both went to Carnegies over the weekend.
[quote=“Ironman”][quote=“Josefus”]He still posts.Dr_Zoidberg IS Taichung Social Club.
Talking about himself using 3rd person tense makes it a bit confusing though.[/quote]
I think they both went to Carnegies over the weekend.[/quote]
I’m my own best friend.