Re: sig rule modification
what would be the point in the 30 day wait for access to the invites section then if members can post giveaways in their sigs. n00bs wll respond to them and not every full member will care whether theyre sealing with a pneub or not and that would make a mockery of the 30 day rule. anyway if n00b members see offers in sigs they will start putting them in their own and if you dont want to make extra work for the staff then youre going to have to let them do it as well and that again would render the 30 day rule pointless.
Re: sig rule modification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aysomc
im absolutely fine with no requesting invites in your sig and i think that rules is fine but i think we should be allowed to post what invites we can give for free in our sigs. i know other members can see that havnt been here for 30 days but the members that have been here 30 days all know that you dont give out invites on this forum to those who havnt met the requirements. i just find it easier for myself to write what i had which is "pm me for free mma-tracker, scc, and TL invites", as opposed to creating a thread saying i have those. if someone that hasnt been here for 30 days pm's me about them im going to ignore him, i had that sig up for over a week and didnt get a single pm from any "n00bs". this would be a tiny rule change and wouldnt affect much of anything, but it would help all of us who dont want to create a new thread to say we have some invites tht we dont require any ss's for. it just doesnt seem fair that we cant say what invites we want to give for free in our sig as long as we only give them to members who have been here over 30 days. just my 2 cents and skizo said if i wanted to bring it up this is the place.
Grotesque word bricks should be banned, however.
My eyes are bleeding.
-bd :dabs:
Re: sig rule modification
And also if they were in your sig then the person could look in the profile and contact via msn or whatever. It's a stupid idea. I agree with bd, aysomc should be banned.
Re: sig rule modification
Maybe putting something either funny, interesting or personal would be better for sigs....your idea sounds rather lame :dabs:
P.S. Skizo lied and he will now ravage you..
Re: sig rule modification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
brotherdoobie
Grotesque word bricks should be banned, however.
My eyes are bleeding.
you're referring to word blocks not word bricks and i dont care about my english, its a fucking forum. maybe i should be trendy and say my eyes are bleeding from your misuse of words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr JP Fugley
And also if they were in your sig then the person could look in the profile and contact via msn or whatever. It's a stupid idea. I agree with bd, aysomc should be banned.
he was saying word "bricks" should be banned, not me, try reading a bit next time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
benchez
Maybe putting something either funny, interesting or personal would be better for sigs
maybe since its my sig i should decide what i put there.....yea.
glad to see a simple idea gets met with moronic comments from every angle in an attempt to be funny or something. A+ for effort guys but put in some actual work if you want to talk shit. this isnt to the guys who gave real feedback, just the asshats.
Re: sig rule modification
Maybe the period should be extended from one to a two months wait, before allowing new members access to the BitTorrent invite forum. Make a certain number of posts statutory,... in the Lounge. So we can check them out first before these idiots get access. Make sigs a privilege and let Skizo control them for pixels, spam or surreptitious forms of trading.
Re: sig rule modification
Invite trading and everything to do with it should be kept in the Inbred Section. I would go even further and ban any mention of invite trading and private bittorrent sites in sigs.
Ultimately anyone who takes bittorrent invites too seriously should be banned to the Inbred Section (thus barring them from posting in the other sections of the board)
Re: sig rule modification
Hmm that's an idea.
Instead of banning users from entering the invites section when they mention it outside of the invites section, we could ban them form the rest of the board and make them stay in the invites section. :)
Re: sig rule modification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rossco
Hmm that's an idea.
Instead of banning users from entering the invites section when they mention it outside of the invites section, we could ban them form the rest of the board and make them stay in the invites section. :)
That actually makes no sense, in a fantastically sensible way.
If manker were alive he would tell you to make it so.
Re: sig rule modification
The way this could work would be to remove sig view from n00bs and Guests if possible.
The ability for n00bs to have sigs on the site would also need to removed...
