UDWiki talk:Administration/Policy Discussion/Appropriate Signatures

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

I like it, though there may be some questions on what is considered offensive...and as for the no swear words...what of ASS? --SirensT RR 20:13, 26 September 2006 (BST)

or STFU for that matter?--Gage 22:18, 26 September 2006 (BST)
Well, STFU by itself is harmless, unless you know what it stands for. If you know what it stands for, chances are you don't care about swear words to begin with. --SirensT RR 01:21, 27 September 2006 (BST)
STFU Mia XD.--Gage 01:39, 27 September 2006 (BST)

A lot of this is very sensible. What's the trouble with php scripts? --Toejam 04:36, 27 September 2006 (BST)

Some images can be set up in a way that when viewed, they log the user off the Wiki...I know that for certain. There are probably more maliscious uses, but I don't think we have to worry about that anymore. It doesn't look like the wiki allows external images anymore. --SirensT RR 15:00, 27 September 2006 (BST)
Right. Someone said you had that set up one at some point, but I didn't believe it. Quite interesting that you confirm their accusations out of the blue. –Xoid STFU! 15:17, 27 September 2006 (BST)
What can I say? I really hated Amazing at that point. --SirensT RR 15:24, 27 September 2006 (BST)
So the php part could be taken out. IMO so could the part about logout links: I find them amusing more than anything else. --Toejam 21:39, 27 September 2006 (BST)

Again, since when is colorful language illegal on the wiki and wouldn't it look foolish to write a paragraph full of obscenity and then sign it with a censored signature? --Ron Burgundy 17:24, 27 September 2006 (BST)

I agree. This wiki gets more like a fucking right wing christian fascist organization every day. Don't fuck with our freedom of speech, because curse words don't hurt the wiki. Bubba 04:24, 28 September 2006 (BST)
I'll go with Ron once more, swear words should be allowed aslong as they do not directly insult another user. Pillsy Hunt! FC! 14:15, 30 September 2006 (BST)
  • This is by far one of the more sane and sensible solutions to the signature issue than others currently under vote. It's akin to what many other websites do for User ID images on websites, and it could work quite easily. I'd vote in favor for it...if it weren't for the touchy issue of "inappropriate or offensive images". I'm kind of with Ron and the others on this one. BUT! Your policy has a LOT of merit. Perhaps you should rephrase this section, or better yet simply remove that from your policy list. Stick to the BASICS of what you're trying to do, and let the community conciousness dictate the sense of "inapprorpriate/offensive". Otherwise you're biting off more than any of us can chew. --MorthBabid 19:39, 5 October 2006 (BST)
  • I agree the policy is sensible because it is objective except for the innappropriate and offensive images part. Remove this and it works. Bubba 23:59, 6 October 2006 (BST)
  • I guess the author didn't agree? --MorthBabid 04:48, 11 October 2006 (BST)

How about some appropiate credit hey? - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 08:34, 29 September 2006 (BST)

No. Go back to SW and stop being an attention whore. Cyberbob  Talk  09:35, 29 September 2006 (BST)
Cyberbob, stop trolling. Jedaz, yeah, forgot about that. I'll give you credit for it.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 15:12, 29 September 2006 (BST)
I bet you will. Cyberbob  Talk  15:25, 29 September 2006 (BST)
Thanks General. And Cyberbob, considering that he copied it word for word exactly it's not too much to ask for a little recognition for the work that I've done towards the policy. - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 01:59, 30 September 2006 (BST)

What are we waiting for?

What are we waiting for? I think the sooner this policy is in place the better. After all this general idea was the core of the recent drama. - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 06:30, 10 October 2006 (BST)

Take out the part about the swear words and it might get my vote.--Gage 06:36, 10 October 2006 (BST)
I had a look and I can't see any part about swear words. Actually the General took it out as you can see by this diff link. But I'm wondering why the General hasn't gotten around to putting it up for voting. Anyway I'm not going to touch the policy because it's the Generals job to do so. - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 06:42, 10 October 2006 (BST)
Just do it?--Gage 06:45, 10 October 2006 (BST)
Fine then, just give me a bit... - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 06:54, 10 October 2006 (BST)
There we go, and since I made a major contribution to it I guess it's fair that I get to start the voting, and after all it will help the wiki. - Jedaz - 09:34/7/12/2019 06:59, 10 October 2006 (BST)
Personal tools
advertisements