What exactly is so harsh about reducing the signature's content to its original purpose? A signature is supposed to be a line of text, not a jungle of quotes, images and obnoxious font sizes that keep attracting ones attention from the actual post content. If people keep abusing these properties even after multiple reactions from others, I find it no more than justified to remove them. The fact that over 90% of the users (okay, that's a wild guessMr. Flay wrote:These decisions seem to be awfully draconian, however.
) don't even use these properties says enough about public opinion.btw, here's a sample of dictionary.com on sigs that's so true:
The composition of one's sig can be quite an art form, including an ASCII logo or one's choice of witty sayings (see sig quote, fool file). However, large sigs are a waste of bandwidth, and it has been observed that the size of one's sig block is usually inversely proportional to one's prestige on the net.