Option to hide administrators, moderators, and stewards signatures

[~Scootaloo 440]

Sometimes we come across a signature we don't like or we simply don't want to see for whatever reason. No big deal we can simply hide it by pressing the small "X" near the person signature (in the upper right hand corner), but not with Moderators/Administrators/Stewards.

 

I can't really understand why we are not allowed to hide a "Stewards" signature. As for moderators/administrators they have something important to say about something I guess I get that, but for me personally seeing Lightning Dust with her navel showing is nice though not a big priority or some Pokemon for that matter (I'm looking at you Vaporeon). 

 

The way I see it is that I should not have to be subjected to seeing someones signature just because that user happens to be an admin/mod/stewards.

 

Advantages of being able to hide (mods/admins/stewards) signatures:

 

-More screen space (I'm on a laptop so if you are on too you could probably relate)

-Better load times (less images = faster load speed)

 

Demonstration (excuse the blurriness, but don't worry it is still readable):

 

Edited March 24, 2013 by ~Scootaloo

[MrL0LZ 866]

You can't hide an admin/mod/steward's signature? That's extremely stupid, I don't really see why a staff's signature is really important at all, I mean, on the rare occasion it could be, but for the most part it's not, I don't even think i've seen one staff signature that had useful information on it. 1+ to this.

[NavelColt 22,880]

From a glance, we weren't even aware of this. The forum's system automatically makes it so staff accounts are immune to many of the inherent things members can do. Same way I don't believe we can be blocked. I'm sure it's no issue for this to be looked into, though. This doesn't matter in the long run.

I don't even think i've seen one staff signature that had useful information on it. 1+ to this.

 

*points at mine and coughs*

[~Scootaloo 440]

 

I'm sure it's no issue for this to be looked into, though. This doesn't matter in the long run.

 

 

This isn't really that big of a deal, but I just don't like a few admins/mods/stewards signatures in particular. I do like your signature though XD.

[Zoop 8,384]

Foolish mortals.

 

You dare seek to squash the celestial beauty and undeniable majesty contained within the signatures of the MLP Forums staff? What manner of nons--------

 

Yeah, I never even realized that this was prevented at all. Seems a bit goofy, to be honest. Can see about getting it looked into, but I don't know that we'll be able to give it any sort of priority given that it's a fairly minor thing overall.

 

 

 

This isn't really that big of a deal, but I just don't like a few admins/mods/stewards signatures in particular. I do like your signature though XD.

 

You like mine, right? Right?

[~Scootaloo 440]

 

You like mine, right? Right?

 

 

Would you like me to be honest or tell you a sugarcoated lie?

[Leafeon 2,702]

You like mine, right? Right?

No. Your's is bad and you should feel bad.

 

It's.... nice.

[NavelColt 22,880]

This isn't really that big of a deal, but I just don't like a few admins/mods/stewards signatures in particular. I do like your signature though XD.

 

You like mine, right? Right?

 

Would you like me to be honest or tell you a sugarcoated lie?

 

He's saying mine is sexy and awesome and yours is full of obscure characters nobody knows, Zoop. It's okay. We're here for you.

[~Scootaloo 440]

 

He's saying mine is sexy and awesome and yours is full of obscure characters nobody knows, Zoop. It's okay. We're here for you.

 

Pretty much this.

 

Spitfire > Obscure Anime Character

[MrL0LZ 866]

*points at mine and coughs*

I stand corrected. 

[~Scootaloo 440]

Added a poll.

 

Also @Zoop and @~Chaotic Discord~ it's time to settle this.

Edited March 24, 2013 by ~Scootaloo

[Shanks 10,816]

I haven't really noticed myself, I kind of forgot you could even hid anyones signature. I guess it makes sense to have this option for mods and admins signatures as well but just don't see why it should be a major priority.

[Betez 1,734]

I'd think that there'd be a little check box to let users block staff members' signatures in the Admin section, wouldn't there be?

 

Doesn't seem all that hard to fix, or maybe I'm just completely over-simplifying it.

Edited March 24, 2013 by Link

[Starshine 16,333]

I believe giving members an option to block staffs' signatures will also give them an option to block their posts and messages, which can prevent them from effectively moderating stuff and what not

 

I once asked the same question to Feld0, he answered that the ignoring feature can't do the "allows members to block the signatures but not everything else," it's pretty much a one-package deal. Can't find the PM though :c

Edited March 25, 2013 by Starshine

[Batbrony 16,055]

 Didn't even know about this myself, and you'd think I would after being here for almost a year!  As others have said, I think it's a fairly minor issue, since I can't imagine it affects load time that much.  Plus, I love seeing all the community members' signatures anyway (because frankly who in their right mind wouldn't want to see Spitfire in all her sexy navel glory? ), so I have no incentive to hide them in the first place.  Still, I guess there's no harm done if this gets addressed, especially if there are a few members who'd like to see it get addressed.

 

Edit: Just read the post above, and if what Starshine said is correct, then I suppose this reform really isn't an option.  Eh, no big deal.

Edited March 25, 2013 by Batbrony

[NavelColt 22,880]

I believe giving members an option to block staffs' signatures will also give them an option to block their posts and messages, which can prevent them from effectively moderating stuff and what not

 

I once asked the same question to Feld0, he answered that the ignoring feature can't do the "allows members to block the signatures but not everything else," it's pretty much a one-package deal. Can't find the PM though :c

 

If that's true, then this is probably not going to happen anytime soon, if at all, realistically. Scoots has a mountain of crap to code and go through, and Feld0 is busy with Pony.FM and alike projects. Neither of them have the time to develop some complicated work around just so the handful of staff members' signatures have the option of being hidden, for the very minute amount of people who would use said feature.

 

Maybe some time in the future, but not anytime soon I'd imagine. Very, very low-priority.

[Starshine 16,333]

 

If that's true, then this is probably not going to happen anytime soon, if at all, realistically. Scoots has a mountain of crap to code and go through, and Feld0 is busy with Pony.FM and alike projects. Neither of them have the time to develop some complicated work around just so the handful of staff members' signatures have the option of being hidden, for the very minute amount of people who would use said feature.

 

True that. Tinkering around the codes for hours only to risk that someone might found a way to ignore the moderators' actions, it ain't worth a dime of the effort.

 

Especially when the AdBlock can easily block the images directly A_A

 

*run to the hill

[Twilight Sparkle ✨ 8,526]

The hiding of signatures is tied into the ignore list. That means, unfortunately, that it's impossible to grant the ability to ignore one aspect of a staff member (their signature) without granting the ability to ignore their posts and personal conversations, too.

 

You should be able to hide all signatures, however, using the checkbox at the top of your ignore list. As bandwidth usage/loading time was brought up as a concern, hiding everyone's signatures is something that some of you may wish to consider.

[King 5,625]

I dont think I could do it D:

I love looking at that (forgive me Luna) Sexy Spitfire Signature

[Betez 1,734]

Since it's a poll question

 

 

I like Zoop's signature better. Mostly because it changes every time you refresh.

 

 

[NavelColt 22,880]

The hiding of signatures is tied into the ignore list. That means, unfortunately, that it's impossible to grant the ability to ignore one aspect of a staff member (their signature) without granting the ability to ignore their posts and personal conversations, too.

 

You should be able to hide all signatures, however, using the checkbox at the top of your ignore list. As bandwidth usage/loading time was brought up as a concern, hiding everyone's signatures is something that some of you may wish to consider.

 

Due to this here guys, the suggestion is incredibly unlikely to be developed Even if a complicated work-around to this problem -could- be done, Feld0 and Scoots are so very, very busy with projects that it'd be of the lowest priority, and wouldn't get done for quite some time. The best solution is to hide signatures all-together, or to simply ignore signatures you don't particularly care for.

 

Now that that's settled, and the poll tells us who has best signature, I do believe we're through here.