Major Sig Issue

Draupnir

I get the whole ecksor - Swastika OR joke and the visual thing and all that jazz but to be quite honest, although I know the full background of the Swastika, for personal reasons I think that its a bit distasteful to have them on public display in signatures. I also reckon that other users may have the same problem.

Would it be possible to have them banned please.

Frank Grimes

You can turn off sigs in user cp if you don't want to see them.

Third_Echelon

yeah defintely agree with the removal idea... i was looking at some of those threads in work (Work for a German company) and it doesnt look to good if there are bloody swastikas all over the page... apart from that it is distasteful as draupnir has said...

Draupnir

i suppose i could turn them off, but I like to read peoples signatures, some of them are excellent.

Third_Echelon

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
You can turn off sigs in user cp if you don't want to see them.

i dont think thats the issue here Frank... the old brush it under the carpet routine doesnt really work..

Hobart

Are you suggesting that we ban sigs that people find offensive, or sigs that are considered bad taste?

tman

being able to ignore img tags in sigs would be a handy option

Emboss

Originally posted by Third_Echelon
yeah defintely agree with the removal idea... i was looking at some of those threads in work (Work for a German company) and it doesnt look to good if there are bloody swastikas all over the page... apart from that it is distasteful as draupnir has said...

Well you're in there to work not be looking at boards!

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by Third_Echelon
i dont think thats the issue here Frank... the old brush it under the carpet routine doesnt really work..

It's not brushing it under the carpet, fair enough they're using an image that some might find offensive but it's no reason to ban the sigs in question, IMO.
If the person doesn't like looking at the image they can switch sigs off.
There's lots of things people find offensive, should all these be banned?

flogen

If I recall correctly DeV deleted a sig with a swastika before, it was part of the BLP thing, and part of their 'sign' was a swastika.

I understand that the swastika isnt originally Nazi, but the way its layed out there (red with with circle) makes it look very Nazi to me, which could be quite offensive to some people (I personally get the joke, but think its uneccisary, although I wouldnt go nuts over it tbh)

Flogen

Sleipnir

while some could argue that it's just for a bit of fun, I just don't agree that the swastika should be used to symbolise anything anymore.
It used to be a good luck symbol but since countless millions died under it's symbol I don't think it's appropriate to use it now for anything.

GoneShootin

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
You can turn off sigs in user cp if you don't want to see them.

Whenever theres a disbute about a signature therse always someone that comes back with this remark. Its that nice easy answer for someone unwilling to tacke the issue head on.

If I didnt like your avatar would you suggest I turn them off ? If I found your name offensive what would you have me do then ? Your answer of TURN EM OFF doesnt float. Dont bring out your CENCERSHIP FOR THE MASSES argument either. These things have to be taken on case by case basis. Sig images RARELY give people problems, so why should Draupiner be forced to turn em off because just ONE sig image is causing grief ?

On the sig itself, I personally dont mind the swasticka as I am taking the image in the context thats its being displayed. But that "logo" has a chilling past and I would agree that it should be removed. There are other ways of getting the point across without using THAT logo....

Third_Echelon

Originally posted by Emboss
Well you're in there to work not be looking at boards!

ssshhhh!! dont tell anyone

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
It's not brushing it under the carpet, fair enough they're using an image that some might find offensive but it's no reason to ban the sigs in question, IMO.
If the person doesn't like looking at the image they can switch sigs off.
There's lots of things people find offensive, should all these be banned?

I think it is reason enough to ban it from being used... didnt you do history as school???

last week a user (cant remember who) was asked to remove a picture of three man utd players by Dev because it looked g@y!!! Now if trivial stuff like that can be removed (i thought it was silly though) this should be....
What if you want to see other pictures in sigs... just because of this you dont have that choice???

flogen

come to think of it, DeV asked for a swastika to be removed before because it was being used as a joke, and the historical connections of the symbol should not be taken lightly.

I would agree, its not something that should be used as part of a joke tbh, especially not in the way the 'swastika' OR sig is using it.

Flogen

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by Third_Echelon
didnt you do history as school???

Yes, but I don't see what your point is.
Like Hobart said too, should everything that some people find offensive be banned too?
GoneShootin, going by your argument then, that sig doesn't cause me grief so should it not be banned as a result?

Hobart

Originally posted by GoneShootin
Whenever theres a disbute about a signature therse always someone that comes back with this remark. Its that nice easy answer for someone unwilling to tacke the issue head on.

If I didnt like your avatar would you suggest I turn them off ? If I found your name offensive what would you have me do then ? Your answer of TURN EM OFF doesnt float. Dont bring out your CENCERSHIP FOR THE MASSES argument either. These things have to be taken on case by case basis. Sig images RARELY give people problems, so why should Draupiner be forced to turn em off because just ONE sig image is causing grief ?

On the sig itself, I personally dont mind the swasticka as I am taking the image in the context thats its being displayed. But that "logo" has a chilling past and I would agree that it should be removed. There are other ways of getting the point across without using THAT logo....

I disagree. While I think that the ethos behind the sig is childish, I do think that the sybolism is central to the message he is trying to convey.

Guess what? People are being killed in Iraq, kids are starving in Africa and the www is a big place, i.e. its a grown up un-pc world out there. Grow up and accept the sig for what it is.

We all know the Nazi's were bad bad people, we all know what the swastika sybolises. It's flag ffs.

Originally posted by Third_Echelon
last week a user (cant remember who) was asked to remove a picture of three man utd players by Dev because it looked g@y!!

Thats not true. I would suggest you get your facts straight.

Asok

Well being german/irish i take my sig in the full context its meant. tbh its not like im a jack booted skin headed neo socialist nazi hell bent on destroying all the jewish people....... now the IJC is another matter .If I had the swastika on its own i would definitly see peoples problems with it and tbh i would never use it on its own but in this case its more satire on ecksors unique brand of adminning . Aslo im fairly sure a boards user has a picture of good old uncle adolf as their avatar with a tag of "Hail victory" who tbh is more of a historical monster than a symbol adopted by the nazi party.

Third_Echelon

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
Yes, but I don't see what your point is.
Like Hobart said too, should everything that some people find offensive be banned too?
GoneShootin, going by your argument then, that sig doesn't cause me grief so should it not be banned as a result?

the fact is though that the majority of people would find it offensive...

Third_Echelon

Originally posted by Hobart
Thats not true. I would suggest you get your facts straight.

I only read the thread quickly and that seemed to be the general jist of what was going on... what exactly was the case then?

Rabies

The sig got a smile out of me. Taught it was funny. Maybe its just me but I can see the joke in it.

last week a user (cant remember who) was asked to remove a picture of three man utd players by Dev because it looked g@y!!!

I'm fairly sure Dev didn't ask for it to be removed, although he did make a comment about it.

ferdi

do the people with a Swastika in their sigs, need it there?

no.

will it hurt them to have it romoved?

no.

does the Swastika offend people?

yes.


my question is why shouldnt these sigs be removed? i have had sigs romoved on a few occasions, i didnt cry, i just got a new one. there should be no debate here, get ride off them./

Asok

As a wolf lover i find rabies sig deplorable as it mocks the diminishing numbers of wolves left in the wild!

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by ferdi
there should be no debate here, get ride off them./

Interesting argument coming from someone who finds the Swatstika offensive.

Hobart

Originally posted by Third_Echelon
I only read the thread quickly and that seemed to be the general jist of what was going on... what exactly was the case then?

For some reason, I don't exactly know why, ecksor deleted it, may have broken some rules or summit. The users in question started a thread and in the midst of a quite interesting discussion "yawn", Dev made a comment that he thought it looked gay/ghey. A jedi knight took a fence, and they all lived happily ever after, and the thread was locked.

GoneShootin

Originally posted by Hobart Grow up and accept the sig for what it is. [/B]

Daupier did accept it for what it is, if you read his post he makes the point that he knows all about its history. That doesnt mean that he has to put up with it though, especially if it is causing personal anguish.

Daupier have you tried pming those that have the sig displayed and making your case ? I doubt it would work but its worth a shot

Rabies

Originally posted by Asok
As a wolf lover i find rabies sig deplorable as it mocks the diminishing numbers of wolves left in the wild!

Asok, I'm sorry if this offends you but I'm trying to show how the disease, Rabies can infect usualy passive animals and turn them in killers.

Please note, no wolves were harmed in the making of this sig.

Draupnir

Two relations of mine were injured/killed during ww2, one serving in the British army, one in the bombing of the North Strand. I personally dont like to see Swastika's bandied about in a jovial manner.

Not to mention the feelings of any Jewish members.

Hobart

Originally posted by Asok
As a wolf lover i find rabies sig deplorable as it mocks the diminishing numbers of wolves left in the wild!

As somebody who was previously left permenantly scared (mentally) by the wrong choice of footwear/insulation I find your nic offensive and demand it be changed to APAIROFSOKS.

ferdi

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
Interesting argument coming from someone who finds the Swatstika offensive.

no i dont.

i just have the ability to feel "empathy" for people to do.

DRakE

Everyone's reading waaay too much into this..

The sig is funny.

Third_Echelon

Originally posted by DRakE
I just thought it was funny

yeah i was about to say i saw another one today as well... was looking for it but it has found me...

whats the story with that sig anyway?