# Valete, Vox Imperatoris **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 22, 2009, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419 "2009-01-22T06:23:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/161 "2009-01-24T00:31:19Z")
> [@Sr\_Siete](#): > > I can think of several reasons: there may be more than one signature in a page and the reader will need to know which one belongs to whom, you may work with other people and you want to make sure that you are not signing for somebody else by mistake, the client may need to check several signatures in a hurry… > > That’s more than enough to make me think that the convention is not arbitrary. Said reasons may not convince you, but they seem reasonable to me and therefore I don’t see it as a formal error. No, let’s not make up obscure possibilities, if you please. 99% of the business letters I have read come from a single person, with a single signature. For those, which account for the majority of business letters, your rationale does not apply. If you want to make sure you don’t sign the wrong letter, read the header (why would you need the name typed a second time?) or better yet, don’t sign your letters at all. And why would a client be checking signatures? Let’s stop visualizing remote possibilities. For a very large majority of business letters, there’s a single signer and no one receiving it is subjecting it to handwriting analysis. So, for a letter with a single signature–please confine your answer to this–do you still apply the same reasoning as you do for posts? After all, every name after the one on the header _is_ superfluous. ---
**Author:** ![Sr\_Siete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6de8d8/32.png) [@Sr\_Siete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sr_Siete)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/162 "2009-01-24T00:41:09Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > So, for a letter with a single signature–please confine your answer to this–do you still apply the same reasoning as you do for posts? After all, every name after the one on the header _is_ superfluous. Well, I’m sorry, but I still see how it could be necessary: _“You sent me a letter saying that you would have it solved by Wednesday.” “I never sent such letter!” “Yes you did! Look! Here it is, signed by you! Here, under your name!”_ That’s a remote possibility? Sure, but important enough that we still sign letters today and signatures are still functional. You disagree? Well, don’t sign anything ever again! But as long as I still see it as a necessary convention, I’m intellectually unable to consider it an error. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/163 "2009-01-24T00:53:09Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > No. Those markings do not flow logically from the text surrounding them. Yet, weirdly, there is a tradition hundreds of years old of including signoffs in communication. It’s a wonder Western civilzation has endured. “But wait!” you, or someone else, will soon say. “A message board is not like a letter! Well, it’s very much like a letter, I mean, it’s written communication, a complete thought ending in a distinct conclusion, more like a letter than a conversation, and expecting a later, similary composed reply…but it’s not _entirely_ like a letter! There is a small difference!” And then into that small difference, pour rage and scorn. ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/164 "2009-01-24T00:56:08Z")
> [@Q.E.D](#): > > No, it’s true. Your weenieness is amusing. Isn’t your mom tired of you living in her basement? ---
**Author:** ![joyfool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@joyfool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joyfool)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/165 "2009-01-24T00:59:33Z")
It might be worth noting that, at least for some people I’m sure, that just putting your name at the bottom of a post might not constitute the same thing that irriatates them as does those that have longer sign-offs. I know in **Sailboat** ’s case back when s/he did that, it never even registered. So perhaps the issue doesn’t lie so much there. Just sayin’. ---
**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 24, 2009, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/166 "2009-01-24T01:02:53Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > Have you ever been outdoors? > [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > Isn’t your mom tired of you living in her basement? Verily, the pair of you have wounded me deeply with your sophisticated rapier wits. I bow to your maturity and sharpness of tongue, sirs! ---
**Author:** ![Jeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jeff)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/167 "2009-01-24T01:06:12Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > Isn’t your mom tired of you living in her basement? Okay, who misplaced the shining collective wit of the SDMB? **Stinks Fish Pot** is trying to do a thing and needs it. Semper fudge, Jeff ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/168 "2009-01-24T01:17:00Z")
> [@Jeff](#): > > Okay, who misplaced the shining collective wit of the SDMB? **Stinks Fish Pot** is trying to do a thing and needs it. > > Semper fudge, > Jeff It’s **Stink** Fish Pot, not **Stinks** , Sir! 😃 And I wasn’t trying to be witty. It was a serious question. > [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Verily, the pair of you have wounded me deeply with your sophisticated rapier wits. I bow to your maturity and sharpness of tongue, sirs! Those are pretty big words for a guy that talks about weenies and weenieness. Good for you, Jack! Choke on it, SFP ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/169 "2009-01-24T01:19:23Z")
For those who proposed the “ignore list” solution: > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > [QUOTE=Vox Imperatoris] > Not this again! In the other thread about this exact same subject, Ed Zotti personally came out and okayed a one- or two-line signature as an acceptable exception to the one-sig-per-thread rule. > > Valete, > Vox Imperatoris You have confused the teacher’s reluctant permission with the teacher’s blessing. I suspect that when you are 16, any personal attention from the Teacher beats none at all, even if the attention was generated by farting repeatedly at the back of the class. [/QUOTE] It doesn’t work, because when someone quotes him, you still see the stupid Valete, Vox Imperatoris. Gamisou, Polerius ---
**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 24, 2009, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/170 "2009-01-24T01:23:16Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > And I wasn’t trying to be witty. It was a serious question. Ah, I see. Presumably, you ask because you’re unfamiliar with other living arrangements. It might surprise you to know the vast majority of adults such as I don’t live with their parents, in a basement or otherwise. Perhaps some day you’ll join us. Strive forth, Q ---
**Author:** ![Jeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jeff)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/171 "2009-01-24T01:27:02Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > It’s **Stink** Fish Pot, not **Stinks** , Sir! 😃 > > And I wasn’t trying to be witty. It was a serious question. The serious answer would be that trailer parks don’t have basements. Duh. And he googled them pretty words using a stolen wi-fi signal. Semper fudge, Jeff ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/172 "2009-01-24T01:27:33Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > No, let’s not make up obscure possibilities, if you please. 99% of the business letters I have read come from a single person, with a single signature. For those, which account for the majority of business letters, your rationale does not apply. If you want to make sure you don’t sign the wrong letter, read the header (why would you need the name typed a second time?) or better yet, don’t sign your letters at all. And why would a client be checking signatures? Let’s stop visualizing remote possibilities. For a very large majority of business letters, there’s a single signer and no one receiving it is subjecting it to handwriting analysis. > > So, for a letter with a single signature–please confine your answer to this–do you still apply the same reasoning as you do for posts? After all, every name after the one on the header _is_ superfluous. I’m still trying to figure out what you mean by the name being in the header on a business letter. Where’s the name? On the letterhead, perhaps? Isn’t that relatively uncommon in the business world? I used to do clerical in a variety of settings and have transcribed a fair amount of letters for business people in different fields and, in the vast majority of cases, the letterhead contains the name of business and contact information. The letter writer’s name is in the signature block at the bottom of the page. At the top of the page is the recipient’s name and address block along with a salutation. At most, the letter writer’s name would show up twice on the page, both in the signature block (one handwritten signature and one typed name and title). Can you clarify what you mean? Also, you might want to consider that legally-speaking, a signed letter is much better evidence that so-and-so ‘said’ this than an unsigned letter. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/173 "2009-01-24T01:34:32Z")
Since the current policy is to allow such signoffs, and some people don’t care if they piss off people with their signoffs, it seems to me that the only way to fix this is for everyone who is annoyed by these to start using an inane/annoying signoff. If there are enough people involved in this effort (particularly some prolific posters), all the threads in all the forums will be filled with inane/annoying signoffs, and, I assume, at some point, the PTB will ban them. Who’s with me? Δεν μπορώ να σκεφθώ μιαν ευφυή προσυπογραφή Polerius ---
**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/174 "2009-01-24T02:08:04Z")
I just had to bring up the similarity of saying ‘IT’ to the Knights who so recently said ‘NEE’ wait for it The Obamas are fisting in the Whitehouse Chacoguy420 ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/175 "2009-01-24T02:12:48Z")
> [@Jeff](#): > > The serious answer would be that trailer parks don’t have basements. Duh. > > And he googled them pretty words using a stolen wi-fi signal. > > Semper fudge, > Jeff Well played, **Jeff**. I tip my hat to you! You also have a better sig than mine, but I’ll have to live with it. > [@Q.E.D](#): > > Ah, I see. Presumably, you ask because you’re unfamiliar with other living arrangements. It might surprise you to know the vast majority of adults such as I don’t live with their parents, in a basement or otherwise. Perhaps some day you’ll join us. Dude. Let it go already. I can’t compete with someone building their post count to 22,000. Seriously. If you need an insult to keep going, see **Jeff** ’s post. Choke on it, SFP ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/176 "2009-01-24T02:14:49Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Since the current policy is to allow such signoffs, and some people don’t care if they piss off people with their signoffs, it seems to me that the only way to fix this is for everyone who is annoyed by these to start using an inane/annoying signoff. > > If there are enough people involved in this effort (particularly some prolific posters), all the threads in all the forums will be filled with inane/annoying signoffs, and, I assume, at some point, the PTB will ban them. And rightfully so. People who adopt a mannerism they find irritating, with the express goal of irritating others, deserve to be banned. Particularly if they do so prolifically. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Creaky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e68b1a/32.png) [@Creaky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Creaky)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/177 "2009-01-24T02:33:17Z")
Oh my God, this is totally hilarious that this thread has gone four pages! Yeah! Let’s hear it for extreme silliness! 😃 (Yes, I am silly too.) ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/178 "2009-01-24T02:55:28Z")
> [@Mtgman](#): > > And rightfully so. People who adopt a mannerism they find irritating, with the express goal of irritating others, deserve to be banned. Particularly if they do so prolifically. > > Enjoy, > Steven Agreed. Bean and Cheese, Burrito ---
**Author:** ![Auntbeast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Auntbeast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Auntbeast)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/179 "2009-01-24T03:51:38Z")
> [@Mtgman](#): > > And rightfully so. People who adopt a mannerism they find irritating, with the express goal of irritating others, deserve to be banned. Particularly if they do so prolifically. > > Enjoy, > Steven I think that about sums up the discussion/dick waving. Ah fuck, I was going to talk about how well laid out the messages are here and how easy they are to read because we uphold a standard of posting that eases communication. Having deviations from that communication that do not relay any information, or, at least, relay redundant information repeatedly, really takes away from the subjects at hand. He’s the guy wearing the propeller hat to be “different.” At the end of the day, it just tells people more about you than you are probably comfortable with. Or, to quote my english teacher, don’t tell me how different and distinct you are, show me. He’s telling more with that signature than all of his posts combined. I do think at this point, he is doing it to be jerkish. Invoking Ed doesn’t help change the impression. ---
**Author:** ![Hazle\_Weatherfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Hazle\_Weatherfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazle_Weatherfield)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419/180 "2009-01-24T04:02:27Z")
> [@Auntbeast](#): > > I think that about sums up the discussion/dick waving. > > Ah fuck, I was going to talk about how well laid out the messages are here and how easy they are to read because we uphold a standard of posting that eases communication. Having deviations from that communication that do not relay any information, or, at least, relay redundant information repeatedly, really takes away from the subjects at hand. > > He’s the guy wearing the propeller hat to be “different.” At the end of the day, it just tells people more about you than you are probably comfortable with. > > Or, to quote my english teacher, don’t tell me how different and distinct you are, show me. He’s telling more with that signature than all of his posts combined. > > I do think at this point, he is doing it to be jerkish. Invoking Ed doesn’t help change the impression. Thank you, Aunt Beast. This would be the perfect way to end this (and the other!) thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/valete-vox-imperatoris/482419.md?page=10)