Utopia Temple Forums

Utopia Temple Forums (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/index.php)
-   Polls Heaven (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   User bashing on signatures. (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/showthread.php?t=77447)

Acadian9 10-Apr-2009 00:51

User bashing on signatures.
 
I've noticed people bashing other users on their signatures, usually by showing a quote by someone in an attempt to make them look bad. Personally, I think this is just a low blow to make that person look bad. This poll was somehting I jsut thought of making after seeing someone else getting a low blow by someone who shall not be named. I remember a while back someone had my quotes on their siggy and I thought it was immature, stupid and quite rude. it's one thing to disagree with someones opinion but to flaunt it everywhere you go is just ridiculous.

BTW I wasn't sure of what to use for pro-siggy, so used highlight due to lack of personal vocabulary.

Felix Zalitz 10-Apr-2009 00:58

Re: User bashing on signatures.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Acadian9 (Post 1670700)
I've noticed people bashing other users on their signatures, usually by showing a quote by someone in an attempt to make them look bad. Personally, I think this is just a low blow to make that person look bad. This poll was somehting I jsut thought of making after seeing someone else getting a low blow by someone who shall not be named. I remember a while back someone had my quotes on their siggy and I thought it was immature, stupid and quite rude. it's one thing to disagree with someones opinion but to flaunt it everywhere you go is just ridiculous.

BTW I wasn't sure of what to use for pro-siggy, so used highlight due to lack of personal vocabulary.

I'd have to agree with the majority of what you said. This is especially true when the quotes aren't even in context of what the person was actually saying. It makes the user (with the signature) look like a fool.

Acadian9 10-Apr-2009 01:00

Re: User bashing on signatures.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Felix Zalitz (Post 1670702)
I'd have to agree with the majority of what you said. This is especially true when the quotes aren't even in context of what the person was actually saying. It makes the user (with the signature) look like a fool.

If they don't agree with someone, keep that disagreement in the thread where it belongs. Don't bring a disagreement about apples being better than oranges to a thread about politics.

Lunor 10-Apr-2009 01:00

In most cases, I ignore the 'out of context userquote' as a low blow.

However, when a link to the (partially) quoted post is added so you can see what it's about, then it's another matter entirely.
That removes the whole reason I would otherwise think of it as a low blow (unless the post shows the quote is taken out of context too much, in which case it's a low blow which also makes the signature user look bad).

Plus sometimes they're very amusing. If there's a link to the quoted post and they're still funny, then they're pretty awesome.

Celtic22 10-Apr-2009 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acadian9 (Post 1670700)
I've noticed people bashing other users on their signatures, usually by showing a quote by someone in an attempt to make them look bad. Personally, I think this is just a low blow to make that person look bad. This poll was somehting I jsut thought of making after seeing someone else getting a low blow by someone who shall not be named. I remember a while back someone had my quotes on their siggy and I thought it was immature, stupid and quite rude. it's one thing to disagree with someones opinion but to flaunt it everywhere you go is just ridiculous.

BTW I wasn't sure of what to use for pro-siggy, so used highlight due to lack of personal vocabulary.

Most Likely Nimon and our MIA COnservative RA3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunor (Post 1670705)
In most cases, I ignore the 'out of context userquote' as a low blow.

However, when a link to the (partially) quoted post is added so you can see what it's about, then it's another matter entirely.
That removes the whole reason I would otherwise think of it as a low blow (unless the post shows the quote is taken out of context too much, in which case it's a low blow which also makes the signature user look bad).

Plus sometimes they're very amusing. If there's a link to the quoted post and they're still funny, then they're pretty awesome.

I pretty much agree with Lunor here (including the compliment on a good poll).

Its interesting to see what people say (To take one example, RA3 drawing parralells between a kid named Adolf Hitler and our President Barack Hussein (spelling?) Obama) and how they make a complete asses of themselves.

It is sometimes taken out of context, which is why i usually look around for the post the quote was taken from before I form an opinion

Syke 10-Apr-2009 03:54

I have to say, I do find them fairly amusing, generally. That said, they tend to be entirely juvenile.

Sarak 10-Apr-2009 04:18

I think in debates where there are strong feelings (which inevitably becomes every debate- as the number of people posting in the thread drops, you have 1-2 vs 1-2 people on different sides of a discussion) people begin to take things a little personally. I do it myself, even though I try not to. In the Nimon+others vs RA3 and Mars vs VoR sigwars (although Mars isn't really participating) i think it's two people who have disagreed with each other so often that they've begun to dislike the person behind the handle, even just a little. Hence the quotes in sigs, which are usually slightly in context but never as a accurate a reflection of the person being quoted as the sigwriter believes.

I did have a quote of VoR in my sig in 2005, so I wouldn't say "lame user bashing" because I know I wasn't trying to bash anyone. I just found what was said to be unbelieveable, my only thought is that maybe I assumed other people would too, if they read it.

I had much more, but I can't make it come out right. Seven rewrites before I gave up.

Gah.. It's a pity that forum debates get so heated people actually stop assuming good faith in one another.

Chillin 11-Apr-2009 23:49

Ha this is a fun poll. Years ago Nimon had some quote of me in his sig (and thinking that ive been posting here thaaaaaat long makes me feel a tad old, but w/e :p). It really didnt bother me all that much. This is a internet forum, I really dont care THAT much if people think of me as a ass. Not to mention it is obviously juvenile.

Greeney 12-Apr-2009 01:07

It's just a pathetic way for one person to try to insult someone else whose perspective the former doesn't agree with, usually started by people who consider themselves more sensible, tolerant, and mature than others.

Nimon 12-Apr-2009 16:31

As you can imagine, I don't really have a problem with it. I do have a problem with it if it's overly childish, and particularly if it's taken entirely out of context. That said, I don't think I've ever had a quote that is really taken out of context. The quotes I chose weren't part of a much bigger picture that showed something different entirely, they were word-for-word quotes (usually with poor grammar intact). Basically, they were simple statements of opinion regarding one thing or another, and the people who said these things apparently genuinely believed these things. At least I can't remember anyone ever PM'ing me asking me to remove it because it was a lie.

I might have gone over the line when I called someone or other a Fascist, but then I was told to remove that part (or it was removed for me, I can't remember entirely).

What I don't usually do is insinuate something about the people (with the obvious exception being the fascist statement). They were simple direct quotes, with maybe an added comment about what it was regarding ("RA3 on the War in Iraq", for example). I haven't used a quote for a sign in quite a while (I haven't really had a sig at all, actually), but if I see something I consider to be a particularly stupid or telling comment, you can be damn sure I won't hesitate to display the stupidity for all to see.

Caelis666 12-Apr-2009 16:42

I have never done it myself and don't think I ever will, and others have had signatures bashing me in it. I don't particularly mind though. Sometimes they are rather amusing, sometimes they are just true and when they're neither, they just show the childishness of the signature bearer.

Royal Assassin3 13-Apr-2009 22:49

Speak of the devil.

I find such sig quotes mildly amusing. It reminds me of how in politics you have to talk like a pile of warm mush all the time for fear that someone will take a quote out of context and try to define you by it. A good lesson for real life, but on the internet it doesn't particularly matter. I'm anonymous precisely because it allows me to speak my mind freely even if some people don't like what I have to say. That's one of the strengths/weaknesses of the internet.

Invictus2001 14-Apr-2009 00:56

never did it never will... its kinda dumb.

Mars II 02-Jul-2009 04:29

I think it's mostly done by cowards who find themselves unable to debate against an opponent so they take to a medium in which someone can't respond directly. Pretty pathetic and sad if you ask me.

flutterbyAR 08-Jul-2009 21:20

Not all quotes in signatures are bad plus if you don't want to "look bad" you should watch what you say around other people.

Mars II 18-Sep-2009 04:04

Re: User bashing on signatures.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by flutterbyAR (Post 1675940)
all quotes in signatures are bad

Quotes in context and done in good faith aren't bad. However, it is rare that someone bashing another user will give them fair treatment in their sig.

(you see what I did there, used your quote out of context)

Nimon 18-Sep-2009 08:34

Re: User bashing on signatures.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mars II (Post 1678518)
Quotes in context and done in good faith aren't bad. However, it is rare that someone bashing another user will give them fair treatment in their sig.

(you see what I did there, used your quote out of context)

That's a very poor example. I can't remember the last time someone blatantly cut off the quote to put in their signature. I've certainly never done that. I've only ever put the entirety of the posters stupidity in the signature, and let it speak for itself.

Mars II 19-Sep-2009 05:17

Not much to work with on that one. One sentence and all. But you see how in an entire debate you could pick out one thing that looks stupid without clarification and add your own in your sig, such as what happened to me. I said "pro terrorist group" referring to a known forum troll and his buddies and the troll then used the quote and claimed I referred to the EU as pro terrorist. That's blatantly dishonest.

Spectre19 19-Sep-2009 07:19

Re: User bashing on signatures.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mars II (Post 1678575)
Not much to work with on that one. One sentence and all. But you see how in an entire debate you could pick out one thing that looks stupid without clarification and add your own in your sig, such as what happened to me. I said "pro terrorist group" referring to a known forum troll and his buddies and the troll then used the quote and claimed I referred to the EU as pro terrorist. That's blatantly dishonest.

Except the context implied you meant the EU. That is your fault, not VoR's.

Mars II 20-Sep-2009 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectre19 (Post 1678580)
Except the context implied you meant the EU. That is your fault, not VoR's.

Is that so now?


Quote:

Also, an EU report alleges illegal expansion. It's all how you say it isn't it? Given how "facts" are presented by the pro-terroris group I don't see why people even bother posting in threads like these.
That could be misunderstood, however the EU doesn't post in these forums to my knowledge.

Quote:

I believe I was quoting filcher and referring to you. Although, that statement and your current sig just go to show you only read what you believe, not believe what your read. Y'know, how I was talking about "facts" in threads like these, meaning your threads.

9/11 is only 6 months away and I still don't know what to get you....
So several months after this post, which was responded to, the sig did not change nor did his creative interpretation of it.

Quote:

Trying to pretend now that the 'pro-terrorist group' is me is a joke. Stop digging, Mars. You are doing yourself no favours.
Despite MY clarification, I am being told what I meant. As far as I know, I'm the local and only expert on what I mean.

I've made the jab several times and you've never responded negatively too it so I just assumed that people who support Hamas (terrorists) or defend Hezbollah (terrorists) support terrorists in general.
Quote:

I believe my point about facts being twisted by you is proven by your signature. It is not true because you will it to be true. What I say means what I say. To further the point the article says:
Despite a second clarification, said troll continued to have the quote there. So rather than debate the fact, it is cowardly posted in a sig with no context except the troll's own.

Why doesn't your bashing in the sig contain a link to it btw? Do you prefer to use Chobham's words without context because you can't debate a point with him able to defend it?


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 02:55.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright ©2000-2005, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.