# Signatures: New rules, need help. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [January 1, 2009, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464 "2009-01-01T13:58:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2009, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/1 "2009-01-01T13:58:19Z")
I went this morning to update my signature–the “main” signature, the one which everyone wants limited to one per page–and it says I can’t because A) it’s too long (I need to reduce to two lines), and B) it’s got the size tags which are no longer allowed. I’ve posted it at the end of the post here, but what am I missing? I just wanted to change the “2008” to “2009” to reflect the new year, and maybe replace an old catchphrase in there, but what is wrong with the thing? Tripler 😕 ::scratches head:: ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/2 "2009-01-01T15:54:28Z")
Jerry needs to tweak the settings for the Charter Member group for Signatures to match the settings for members. You might even want to Email him directly. He apparently made a new user group very recently to resolve the Charter Member issue and has a few more settings to fix. Some related posts: > [@Profile pictures?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/profile-pictures/479254/4): > > A new vBulletin usergroup was created for Charter Members and the profile picture option was initially turned off by default. It should now be available for both Members and Charter Members. > [@Current Status of SDMB Upgrade](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/current-status-of-sdmb-upgrade/462854/215): > > Charter Member user titles have been restored for anyone who has maintained an active subscription since 04/28/04 at 12:00 PM. The Charter Member half price subscription (currently $7.48) has been restored. > > Things to note. There will no longer be a 5 day grace period to renew your Charter Member subscription. Once a Charter Member subscription expires and you’re moved to Guest status you will not be able to regain Charter Member status. Please renew your subscription prior to your subscription expiration. If not your options become a Member subscription at $14.95 or remaining at Guest status. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10631042&postcount=110](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10631042&postcount=110) [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10634656&postcount=217](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10634656&postcount=217) ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2009, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/3 "2009-01-01T23:13:24Z")
Makes sense. I can wait a while–I won’t bother him with such minutia at the moment. . . Tripler Thanks for the heads up! ---
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2009, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/4 "2009-01-01T23:55:33Z")
Testing my sig… ---
**Author:** ![SiXSwordS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/49beb7/32.png) [@SiXSwordS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SiXSwordS)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/5 "2009-01-02T15:12:54Z")
> [@ivylass](#): > > Click here daily to give women free mammograms! You’re deceptive. ---
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/6 "2009-01-02T15:54:17Z")
No, you have a dirty mind. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/7 "2009-01-02T19:14:57Z")
If I remember correctly, you can cheat around the \ tag by using \ instead. ---
**Author:** ![jdavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f6c823/32.png) [@jdavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jdavis)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/8 "2009-01-02T19:36:42Z")
I don’t believe this is an issue with the creation of the new Charter Member usergroup. Both Member and Charter Member usergroups have the same signature length parameters and both usergroups are disallowing signatures of certain lengths/lines in a similar way. I suspect we’re running into an issue between what vBulletin 3.0.x would allow for signatures and what vBulletin 3.7.x will allow. We upgraded vBulletin versions in September and the newer version of vBulletin does not like your current signature. Older signatures from the 3.0.x days are grandfathered in even if they don’t meet the new vBulletin versions rules for signatures. If you try to change an older signature however under this new version it will make you comply with it’s desires. Tripler, try changing your signature to 3 or 4 lines with less characters per line. ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/9 "2009-01-02T20:23:46Z")
Jerry, that seemed to work. Although at one point, I think the signature engine pushed back at the inclusion of “Van Halen.” Must be a classical music loving hamster. But I appear to have it done. **Cervaise** , good point, and I used it. Thanks for the heads up! Tripler Wow. 11 years of the same damn ‘official’ sigline. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/10 "2009-01-02T23:15:11Z")
On the subject of signatures, a clarification on our sig rule has been added to the end of: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7697069&postcount=14](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7697069&postcount=14) ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/11 "2009-01-02T23:43:32Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > On the subject of signatures, a clarification on our sig rule has been added to the end of: > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7697069&postcount=14](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7697069&postcount=14) Thanks Mr. **Zotti** , that is a very clear clarification and far from draconian. **jdavis** , sorry about the bad guess. It seemed likely. ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/12 "2009-01-02T23:58:57Z")
Ugh. So those asinine signatures _are_ now allowed and, since they don’t have to go into the sig file (_why not?_), there’s no way to ignore that useless bit of repeated text. Way to reverse a sensible decision, SDMB! I never thought I’d prefer **Television Without Pity** ’s rules to yours, but at least they have a rule that disallows signing of posts. The old rule was perfectly clear for anyone who wasn’t purposely, stubbornly, trying to get around the rules so their precious names could display in each post no matter how many times they reply to a thread. Not a huge deal but it’s a waste of space and a holdover from a billion years ago, Internet Time. When I see those I feel like I’m reading an old fashioned newsgroup instead of a modern message board. Bad decision, guys. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/13 "2009-01-03T00:06:36Z")
I am loving this rule tada, suckers Sapo. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/14 "2009-01-03T00:14:02Z")
> [@choie](#): > > Ugh. So those asinine signatures _are_ now allowed and, since they don’t have to go into the sig file (_why not?_), there’s no way to ignore that useless bit of repeated text. Way to reverse a sensible decision, SDMB! I never thought I’d prefer **Television Without Pity** ’s rules to yours, but at least they have a rule that disallows signing of posts. See, I’m a bit confused because it seems to me that we’re back where we started. Before there were some who had a signature in the sig file which was only used once a page and those who had a sign off that repeated whenever they posted. Then there were complaints and the mods said no sign offs not in the sig files and not following signature rules. Now it seems that we’ve just reverted back to what it was before. Did I miss something? ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/15 "2009-01-03T00:21:32Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > See, I’m a bit confused because it seems to me that we’re back where we started. Before there were some who had a signature in the sig file which was only used once a page and those who had a sign off that repeated whenever they posted. Then there were complaints and the mods said no sign offs not in the sig files and not following signature rules. Now it seems that we’ve just reverted back to what it was before. Did I miss something? You missed the part where people asked for those to be stopped, which was the cue to make them officially acceptable. tada, bunnies Sapo. ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/16 "2009-01-03T00:23:02Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > See, I’m a bit confused because it seems to me that we’re back where we started. Before there were some who had a signature in the sig file which was only used once a page and those who had a sign off that repeated whenever they posted. Then there were complaints and the mods said no sign offs not in the sig files and not following signature rules. Now it seems that we’ve just reverted back to what it was before. Did I miss something? Basically those repeated signoffs _were_ against the rules, but no one ever bothered enforcing them for some bizarre reason. A few recent pit threads brought the issue to light, mainly 'cause people took folks like **Vox** , **Shodan** , **Left Hand of Dorkness** and **Tripler** to task for bucking the apparent rules. **C.K. Dexter Haven** confirmed that yes, repeat signoffs were indeed against the rules. Folks in favor then claimed that this wasn’t very clear at all, and how on _earth_ would anyone know who they were if they didn’t express themselves, and besides they’ve done it for the past 50 years even dating back to gerbil-powered Telex machines, so how could they possibly be expected to remember such a convoluted rule? And now the rule’s been changed to accomomodate these special snowflakes for whom sig files used once per thread aren’t enough of a method of self-expression. At least that’s my reading of it. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/17 "2009-01-03T01:13:44Z")
We amended the rule because we didn’t feel like wasting a lot of time on things nobody, including us, really cares about. The original idea was to cut down on bedsheet size sigs, funny-the-first-time quotes, and things like that. If people want to sign their names to all their posts, big deal. There will of course be those who see in this a new opportunity to be irritating, but we trust they will be few. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/18 "2009-01-03T01:19:56Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > There will of course be those who see in this a new opportunity to be irritating, but these people will be always with us. As will the folks who insist on being irritated by something so inconsequential. Good show, **Ed** ; you’ve surprised me. Pleasantly, I might add. ---
**Author:** ![Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47c2d/32.png) [@Biffy\_the\_Elephant\_Shrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/19 "2009-01-03T03:35:22Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > If people want to sign their names to all their posts, big deal. Exactly. This was a very sensible move. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464/20 "2009-01-03T17:38:02Z")
One of the major arguments that people who wanted avatars and other bells and whistles used was that they could be turned off like sigs so that those who didn’t want to see them didn’t have to. Have the new rules made it impossible to make sigs don’t show an option? If not, exactly how and where do you do it? If it is true, could you tell us what other changes of bells and whistles are also made mandatorily viewable under the new version so that we have that information for the next go-round of arguing about it? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/signatures-new-rules-need-help/479464.md?page=2)