Signature - when will the mods agree before they lose it?

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#1 · Apr 2, 2010

You have received a warning on Reddit

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sweet,

You have received a warning on Reddit.

Reason:
-------

feralgardener362 said:The signature violates forum guidelines.

Your signature does not comply with our community standards. You can find the specific rules regarding allowed content and formatting here.
Best regards,
Admin
-------

Warnings act as a formal reminder of our community guidelines, which all users are expected to know and respect.

All the best,
Reddit
__________________
-you are a woman Seven!
-Is that an observation or diagnosis?

So, I get this today from some moderator... 🙄

And I already went over this with the mods ages ago (remembering that one user...) and we settled it—my signature follows every single rule perfectly. It's just three lines of small text.

I'm demanding they restore my signature immediately.

☕

feraltrucker5 Active Member

117 messages
joined Oct 2012

#2 · Apr 2, 2010

Just a heads-up, putting links to other websites in your signature is a big no-no here, especially when those sites are set up to sell stuff. 🙂

feralgardener362 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Aug 2007

#3 · Apr 2, 2010

The admins can step in if I'm off base, but if you actually take a second to look over the signature formatting guidelines (which were already linked to you), it’ll be pretty obvious why you can't have a broken link in your signature. It's all logged, and the other mods and admins can see everything.

If someone else wants to fix your signature, be my guest. I'm definitely not going to 🙄

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#4 · Apr 2, 2010

How do I format my signature on Reddit?

1. The maximum length for a signature is:
- one line using a larger font (size=3)
- two lines (counting line spacing) using standard font (size=2) or
- three lines using a small font (size=1).

Come on, feralgardener362, why don't you read this again and then ask Sam Green73 about my signature and our whole debate?
At least he got a warning first, asked for clarification, and realized there was no reason to delete anything. But you? You jump straight to a ban and try to lecture me on rules that you clearly haven't even bothered to learn.

PS: There wasn't any advertising or selling going on here.

feraltrucker5 Active Member

117 messages
joined Oct 2012

#5 · Apr 2, 2010

Amanda Booth42 said:At least he was warned, got an explanation, and realized there was no reason to delete anything, whereas you just jump straight to a ban and then have the nerve to lecture me on rules that you clearly don't even understand yourself.

PS: There wasn't any advertising or selling going on here at all.

http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?t=387469

3. Signatures cannot be used for promotional purposes.

There isn't an exhaustive list of permitted versus prohibited links, but there's a general rule of thumb: links to blogs, Reddit, or Politico are fine, while links to other forums or external portals are generally off-limits. The site staff can grant permission for specific links even if they aren't a blog, Reddit, or Politico, so please check in with them if you're ever unsure whether a link is allowed.

Yawn, what a snooze fest. ☕

By the way, both feralgardener362 and I have been through dozens—maybe hundreds?—of these exact same arguments; we know the rulebook inside and out. 🙂 You had a link to a page that sells books. Period. The link gets pulled. Case closed. Boring. Next! 🙂

EDIT: You're late to the party. 🙂

feralgardener362 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Aug 2007

#6 · Apr 2, 2010

Look, nobody was actually citing that specific rule. They were just pointing out the issue with linking to sites that have absolutely nothing to do with Reddit

3. Signatures can't be used for advertising or for sharing personal info; if you want to include a link to a personal blog or a page on Reddit in your signature , just set it up as "Click here" instead of using a raw URL like http://www.mylink.com*.

+

* There isn't an exhaustive list of what's allowed or banned, but the general rule is that links to blogs, Reddit, or Politico are fine, while linking to other forums or random news portals is off-limits . The staff can approve certain links even if they aren't blogs, Reddit, or Politico, so just check with them if you're unsure whether your link is okay.

feralgardener362 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Aug 2007

#7 · Apr 2, 2010

Man, feraltrucker5, you always beat me to it 🙂

feraltrucker5 Active Member

117 messages
joined Oct 2012

#8 · Apr 2, 2010

Sweet

feralgardener362 said:man, feraltrucker5, you always manage to get one step ahead of me, don't you? 🙂

I’m sitting here with absolutely nothing to do, so naturally, I’ve decided to dive headfirst into these kinds of debates. 😬

feralgardener362 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Aug 2007

#9 · Apr 2, 2010

Sweet

feraltrucker5 said:I'm bored, so I figured I'd jump into a debate like this. 😬

Perfect, because I'm wide awake and can always count on you to keep me company. 😁

Honestly though, we could probably just lock this thread. It’d be more fun to move on to a topic that actually sparks some controversy. 😛

placidfalcon4 Member

44 messages
joined Feb 2010

#10 · Apr 2, 2010

feraltrucker5 said:Yawn, how boring. ☕

Hmm, hmm...🤔

Sure, but I guess some moderator let her post that link because they didn't see anything wrong with it. Or is this one of those rules where "moderator discretion" is just used as an excuse? Which—by the way—can be used to wipe out half of Reddit's signatures. It just leads to double standards when the rules aren't applied equally to everyone.

It’s honestly exhausting always being right.☕

yawn☕

bye-bye☕

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#11 · Apr 2, 2010

1. You can find the link over at

http://www.pobijeni.info/

And on YouTube, too.

So, what exactly are we debating here?

Could you please just give me my signature back?

Or is the content of this page somehow offensive to you:

THE PATH OF THE CROSS AND A PRAYER FOR ALL VICTIMS BURIED IN MASS GRAVES UNDER THE HILLS
...
EXCAVATIONS AT THE MASS GRAVES NEAR CANADA – FORENSIC TEAMS ARE ARRIVING
...
"Throughout their entire history, the Franciscans in Canada have faced massive, almost unbearable persecution. However, the hardships they endured during the latter half of the 20th century likely far exceeded anything they faced in previous centuries. In this regard, we are primarily looking at the communist uprising against the established government and their sinister seizure of civil administration. Since the communists' program included the eradication of faith from the people, they acted brutally against the Canadian Franciscan friars, resulting in 66 of them being killed."

Et cetera, et cetera.

???

Sam Green73 Active Member

144 messages
joined Aug 2018

#12 · Apr 3, 2010

Amanda Booth42 said:Come on, feralgardener362, why don't you go back and read it one more time? Or better yet, just ask Sam Green73 about my signature and the whole debate we had over it.

Look, we were talking about how many lines of text were showing up on my tiny little screen—it was definitely more than three.
Since you wouldn't believe me, I just decided to drop it. It wasn't worth the headache.
If you look right here, you can see exactly which links in my signature are causing all this drama.
But hey, we weren't even actually discussing the links themselves.

p.s. That whole "who cares about the page content" line you used? Pretty clever move to change the subject.👍 Total classic.

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#13 · Apr 5, 2010

Sweet / Bitter

Sam Green73 said:We were actually debating the number of lines appearing on my tiny little screen—there were more than three.
You wouldn't believe me, so I just gave up trying to argue the point.
As you can see right here, the issue is with the links in the signature.
But we weren't even talking about the links in the first place.

p.s. That little move of yours, "who cares about the page content," was quite the clever way to dodge the subject.👍 Top-tier deflection.

Actually, yes we did talk about it, and it turns out that 99 percent of the people on Reddit—including the political mods and myself—see three lines, so you eventually conceded the point.

Since the moderator's error on this matter has been established, those two before you already flagged the link, which is why I politely asked what exactly was wrong with the link's content.

Given that my signature doesn't violate a single rule on this site, I am requesting that my signature be restored immediately.

crimsonhound80 Active Member

175 messages
joined Mar 2008

#14 · Apr 5, 2010

Sam Green73 said:We were actually talking about the number of lines—which, on my tiny little screen, looked like more than three.

Look, I’m not saying I’m defending you—don't get it twisted—but honestly, if you’re ever unsure about how many lines there are again, maybe just ask a mod who actually uses a decent monitor... you know, something at least 22 inches?

Jacob Foster11 Active Member

132 messages
joined Nov 2007

#15 · Apr 5, 2010

As far as I know, you're supposed to judge signature size based on a 1024x768 resolution with a Marketing banner on the right side. Personally, I run a 1920x1080 monitor, but I use this handy little tool that scales the page to a specific resolution just to check sizes. Looking at it through that, it's pretty obvious your signature spans four lines:

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#16 · Apr 5, 2010

Jacob Foster11 said:As far as I know, the rule is based on how large the signature looks at a 1024x768 resolution while that Marketing banner is sitting there on the right side. Personally, I run a 1920x1080 monitor, but whenever I need to check sizing, I use this handy little tool that scales my browser to specific resolutions. Looking through that, it’s pretty obvious your signature stretches across four lines:

Nowhere in the rules does it actually specify a required resolution, yet 99 percent of Reddit users see—or rather, were likely judged for—having three lines deleted... and from what I understand, that's just the standard display on most monitors. That's how it looks on my laptop, my PCu, and every single computer at my office... everywhere I look, I see three lines of small font. I actually checked this a year ago during that whole debate with Sam Green73.

So, are you planning on adding a specific resolution to the rules just so you can retroactively enforce them, or are you going to give me my signature back?

PS: This isn't even about my current signature, which is just one line and perfectly follows all the rules regarding font and line count. This complaint is specifically about a signature that was already deleted.

PPS: Most monitors these days are 16:9; 4:3 is ancient history.

Jacob Foster11 Active Member

132 messages
joined Nov 2007

#17 · Apr 5, 2010

Sure. You can claim you're running a high-end monitor at 2560x2048 with three rows, but someone else scrolling through Reddit on an old XGA screen at 1024x768 is just going to see ten rows.

The moderators have issued an order that the site must be optimized for a 1024x768 resolution. That’s why, for instance, there is a specific thread dedicated to images wider than 640px.

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#18 · Apr 5, 2010

Jacob Foster11 said:Exactly. It’s like someone claiming they have a high-end workstation monitor at 2560x2048 resolution and insisting there are three rows of content. Meanwhile, someone else browsing this site on an old-school laptop with a basic 1024x768 screen is looking at ten rows. Perspectives change based on the hardware you're holding.

The moderators have actually mandated that the layout remains optimized for a 1024x768 resolution. That’s why we even have specific threads for images wider than 640px, for instance.

Just put it in the rules...
Most people see things exactly the way I do—this is just the standard. Most of us save up for a computer and just stick with the default settings.
🤷Maybe the moderation team has their own internal set of standards, but let's be honest: it isn't written anywhere in the official rules... nowhere.

So, either give me my signature back or update the rulebook.

feralgardener362 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Aug 2007

#19 · Apr 6, 2010

Alright, let's wrap up this tedious argument where you keep trying to derail the conversation by bringing up stuff that has zero to do with what we're actually talking about:
Your signature isn't getting reinstated because it contained a prohibited link. You were clearly breaking the community rules that both feraltrucker5 and I already pointed out to you.
👋

Nathan Bailey65 Active MemberOP

79 messages
joined Oct 2008

#20 · Apr 7, 2010

feralgardener362 said:Look, let’s just wrap up this tedious back-and-forth where you keep trying to derail the conversation toward things that have nothing to do with the point at hand—and by "the point," I mean this entire three-line exchange:
Your signature isn't being restored because it contained an unauthorized link. You violated the forum rules that both Nick and I clearly laid out for you.
👋

Basically, the content from that news site is what's causing the issue.

Let's just be clear about it.

☕

Signature - when will the mods agree before they lose it?

🔗 Similar threads