View Full Version : hyperlinks in member signatures

10-24-2008, 06:24 PM
Sandra, you posted your URL at one time.
I did the same.
I have no disclaimer, as do you.
you might have my IP.
I do not engage in subversive hacking, phreaking, or virus technologies with malicious intent towards others.
so what if I have a NEW webserver with a NEW forum?
spell it out.
chat is to come but I don't want the headache of moderation, so maybe not.
chat only to desirables, might be the solution.
you are welcome to post, anytime.

10-24-2008, 06:35 PM
none, when I posted my url I first obtained permission from the webmaster.

10-24-2008, 06:50 PM
I'm asking for feedback concerning URLs in member signatures.

At present, the system is set up to allow links in user signatures, but apparently that seems to be annoying people.

I'd like member feedback on this. What do you, as members, feel would be acceptable for signature links?

Shall we make it so that people who post links in their signatures have to have permission? Or should they be established for so many months first and be members in good standing?

There are times when a link in a signature should be appropriate and there are times when they just aren't, depending on the nature of the content. I'm going to let you members decide. I'll leave this issue open until December 7. After that, whatever you all decide will be the rule. If you can't decide, then I'll set a new rule about that myself, how does that sound?

Also, I'm moving a couple of posts on that topic to this one so you can further discuss that if you want. Apparently a couple of you posted your remarks just before and just after mine before I could close the topic. Good timing, you two.

10-24-2008, 06:59 PM
if its too much hassel for you then nah.
but heck its optional to click it.
so I say yes to URL's in signatures, as long as it passes the censored words filter settings.

10-24-2008, 07:06 PM
for those looking for this URL I mistakenly said I posted, I didn't post it.
I put the URL in my signature.
and it did not contain any censored words unless nightmare or internet are censored.

10-24-2008, 07:10 PM
none, I didn't ask you to remove your link for censored words, I asked you to remove it because of it being considered as spam.

If it is decided here that it's allowable, then you'll be able to post it in your signature again.

10-24-2008, 07:16 PM
ten character limit is troublesome at times...
my response is: ok

10-24-2008, 08:28 PM
I voted.

(scuze me...lol...)

Loren Swelk
10-24-2008, 11:40 PM
It is my opinion that hyperlinks included in the member signature line represents gratuitous advertising and indicates a bloated ego. just sign your name. I personally don't want to peer into your personal life or beliefs.

10-25-2008, 07:13 AM
A link in a signature spam?

So we going to remove putting links in posts as well, last time I checked this was an internet forum whats the point if you can link to content.

Every one needs to lighten up on the spam thing, not every link that is put in is spam. There is very little spam that makes it into this forum where it warrants such limits. It almost the same 5-6 people who post here all the time any way.

Need to lighten up a little.

10-25-2008, 01:01 PM
none, I didn't ask you to remove your link for censored words, I asked you to remove it because of it being considered as spam.

If it is decided here that it's allowable, then you'll be able to post it in your signature again.

Precedence . . You gave the recurring link as one reason you canned Davide. It's the only reason I brought it up when I asked about Dean.Barnett. His multiple posts, the redundant content, and the hyperlink all constituted your definition of Spam in the case of Davide, thus, while one size doesn't necessarily fit all, they are very similar.

If you want to go further in Barnett's case, he's extremely guilty of what YOU define as "Power Posting" . . by answering with link after link, insult often included.

They're YOUR rules. Equal enforcement is probably the best idea . .

10-25-2008, 03:11 PM
Thank you for that feedback, Large.

To everyone:

The forum guidelines and rules are actually two separate things. The forum rules, which are listed at the bottom of that particular post, are not mine -- those are the Chieftain's rules, and those are what we all agree to abide by when we sign on.

The rest concerning forum etiquette is just that - etiquette - and as stated in that post are guidelines. They are not necessarily rules.

I posted those for the purpose of giving people an idea of what is generally accepted and not accepted on most user forums, and to give people a general idea of the types of things I'm looking at as a forum moderator if and when there needs to be intervention. I also look at the flow of the conversation and if it appears that the post fits in with the conversation and is harmless, I'll leave it and not be concerned, so there's a little give there.

Perhaps I've been wrong to allow a little leniency for more established members (such as with Dean.Barnett) than new ones, but it isn't my intention to become anyone's babysitter or censor. Adults should have the ability to get along with each other well, so I leave it up to you all to get along with each other and if something is really bothering you and you need intervention, you can come to me via email or private message.

Once in a while you'll see me step in without my having received emails or PMs, so my saying something isn't always the result of a complaint because I do keep an eye on here.

Concerning davide's posts, I really don't like to bring up when a user is dealt with but I'll go ahead and use this as it's a good example. Davide annoyed a lot of people with his incessant political posts that appeared to be created specifically for the purpose of annoying people.

While I didn't want to infringe on his right to free speech, the reason why I suspended his account until after the election was that his posts disrupted the continuity of discussion and within a matter of days he had ruffled more feathers than a fox in a hen house. So I didn't temporarily suspend him because of his links, I did it because of his disruptive behavior.

I sincerely don't mind the idea of links in someone's signature, but if I have reason to believe that there may be something malicious about that link - say it's obvious spam (as in trying to sell something) or the link leads to a questionable website or something along those lines, then I'll do something about that, like ask the member to remove their link.

If I have any reason at all to suspect that anyone has a link in their signature that might put a member who clicks on that link at risk for their internet safety or security, I'll ask them to remove the link. Examples of this include hacker sites, sites with a virus attached, phishing attempts, and so on. I also hope that forum members would report such a signature if they suspect such a thing.

I need to add here that the icon to report a post does not notify me of the offending post, so please - if someone or some post is offending you, send me an email (pueblowoman@gmail.com) directly or send me a PM and I'll respond as quickly as possible.

I really want this forum to be inviting to all, for established members and new members. I want everyone to be able to enjoy themselves on this forum, I'd like the community to see what a friendly bunch communicates here. So, as Ricardo Montalban used to say in Fantasy Island -- "Smiles, everyone! Smiles!"

10-25-2008, 10:47 PM
basically anyone of us can be considered a spammer because independent writings are had to come by, for instance look at any given strarter thread by anyone of us.
topic for debate 'URL' or brief summary from the chieftain...
anyways I voted for supermod approval because the censored word filter might not search hyperlinks and that would help with abuse on the forum.
cheesy arbitrary determination as to who spams is cheesy even if it has spam in it.
btw can I start a thread about cool music videos without getting banned?

11-26-2008, 07:12 PM
a welcome back anyone?
back to posts in the signatures allowed or dissallowed, and the criteria anyone?