UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Blinking Text Is Annoying

Ban blinking text. There is no need for it. I don't like it. Make it go away. From everything just sigs.

For bob:

The signature policy will be changed thusly:

What wouldn't be allowed

• Signatures which have images higher then 14 pixels high.
• Signatures which generally break the wiki in some way either through formatting or other means.
• Signatures which impersonate another user.
• Signatures which link to any of the following special pages: Special:Userlogout or Special:BlockIP.
• Signatures which link to external links that perform malicious actions (closing the browser for example).
• Signatures which contain images larger then 50kb.
• Signatures which contain blinking text or images that mimic blinking text.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms: # comments ~~~~ or # ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

For

1. Well thought out and coherent.--xoxo 10:05, 14 June 2009 (BST)
2. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 10:06, 14 June 2009 (BST)
3. I--Bonghit420 10:18, 14 June 2009 (BST)
4. We needed this for a long time. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:31, 14 June 2009 (BST)
5. Indeed --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:34, 14 June 2009 (BST)
6. Amen!--Dr Mycroft Chris 11:39, 14 June 2009 (BST)
7. --Cyberbob 11:57, 14 June 2009 (BST)
8. - User:Whitehouse 15:01, 14 June 2009 (BST)
9. --Mr. Angel, Help needed? 16:44, 14 June 2009 (BST)
10. -- Jolly Good--C Whitty 16:51, 14 June 2009 (BST)
11. Yarp -- Cheese 17:51, 14 June 2009 (BST)
12. -- Blinking text is dreadful, and should only be used in applicable (and rare) cases. Knowing you idiots (only a few of you...), that will never happen, so I am fully for this.--The Shoemaker ^{Talk Red Faction} 20:11, 14 June 2009 (BST)
13. - I debated making a blinking yes here, but thought I would regret it. --Haliman - Talk 18:45, 14 June 2009 (BST)
14. - Only because of the "images that mimic blinking" part. Blinking text can be disabled in FF, and I'm guessing the same for other browsers. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 19:02, 14 June 2009 (BST)
15. - All the way.--SirArgo ^Talk 19:21, 14 June 2009 (BST)
16. User pages are fine, but not signatures. --ZsL 22:19, 14 June 2009 (BST)
17. Yes, this is needed.-- Adward  22:42, 14 June 2009 (BST)
18. Yes, fine.. just as long as it doesn't affect my right to have jiggly boobies in my siggie----Sexualharrison 23:35, 14 June 2009 (BST)

    Your tits are fine and as mesmerizing as always.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 23:42, 14 June 2009 (BST)

    What right man would vote for such a hideous policy? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 06:24, 15 June 2009 (BST)

19. Having already supported this in discussion I concur with everyone above --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 04:20, 15 June 2009 (BST)
20. and justified by the problems caused by blinking text in some browsers. Conndraka^{mod TAZM CFT} 06:53, 15 June 2009 (BST)
21. Because it's my first vote on the wiki and I feel the need to agree with people. What about Giles' swirling balls though? Aren't they kind of annoying?--Sadie 07:32, 15 June 2009 (BST)

    There's definitely a spectrum of "move-y-ness" - the boobies above rate low on the scale, his thing rates a medium, and blinking text rates a high and it's what we're primarily voting on. Whether Giles' balls qualifies as "mimicking blinking text" is debatable. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 07:41, 15 June 2009 (BST)

22. They'll be coming for you next, Giles :p -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 13:23 15 June 2009 (BST)

    Haha so true. But as long as we keep mentioning my balls and my "swirling balls" I'll be a happy camper. --_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 16:16, 15 June 2009 (BST)

23. I dislike any image in the signature, what do I do? Pyxzer 15:23, 15 June 2009 (BST)

    kill urself --Cyberbob 15:28, 15 June 2009 (BST)

    Or adblock it. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 17:46, 15 June 2009 (BST)

24. --D.E.ATalk 16:20, 15 June 2009 (BST)
25. about bloody time --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[talk] [wcdz]} 17:34, 15 June 2009 (BST)
26. This has got my vote. I mean. Look how annoying that is. --Axe Hack 23:54, 15 June 2009 (BST)
27. --Zombie Lord 23:57, 15 June 2009 (BST)
28. No need for them. --Honestmistake 13:28, 16 June 2009 (BST)
29. Asheets 15:58, 16 June 2009 (BST)
30. Since when do you get 30 people all voting on a policy. I remember the days when we had to hound 10 or more people to get to voting, else it fails due to lack of minimum requirements. Bah. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:21, 16 June 2009 (BST)
31. Blinking text is annoying and serves no useful purpose.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 11:48, 17 June 2009 (BST)

Against

1. This is a terrible idea, why are you guys wanting to remove a valuable tool from our use -Dawgas 08:48, 17 June 2009 (BST)

   More people should be like this man. Truly he is one of the great minds of this noble wiki. --Cyberbob 08:48, 17 June 2009 (BST)

2. Hey guys, it's actually pretty sweet down here in the "Against" section. We have popcorn and eye rape and everything. :D --Anotherpongo 20:33, 17 June 2009 (BST)

   thank you for reminding me how to use this particular tool, friend -Dawgas 02:26, 18 June 2009 (BST)

3. Against- NO MOAR RULEZ!!!!!!!!!!!! i'll make a serious post explaining my veiw point in a few hours --Imthatguy 15:23, 18 June 2009 (BST)

   no don't --Cyberbob 17:02, 18 June 2009 (BST)