There has been too many people making junk posts just so they can get everyone to look at their signature. This is considered "signature spam" and is not allowed here. Even though we try our hardest to keep things clean and enforce the rules, there will always be spammers who don't care about our rules and they will just go around and spam anyway.

We feel that one way to put this to an end is to only allow people who have upgraded to an MMG supporter account to make signatures. The reason for this is that we know most MMG supporters are already aware of the rules here, and they wouldn't spam everywhere.

I know this is a pretty drastic change and might make people upset, so i wanted to get everyone's opinion on this before we make any changes. I don't want to make people feel alienated and unwelcome here.

Please answer this pool honestly, and feel free to post your opinions about this issue here.

Thank you.

[double post]
BTW: The server is very slow at the moment!?

1. Spammers could upgrade their account in order to spam.

2. I've seen some guys already upgraded their account at their first post.

3. Not every supporters know the rules, and not every non-supporters don't know the rules.

4.
Typo?

I voted for the first: "Yes, only MMG Supporter should have a signature".
But I think its a little bit unfair if only MMG Supporter can have a sig, it would be better if Non-Supporters could only have a text signature and Supporters can have Banner pictures. Because it could be seen as you are on the way to make more money out of it if you force people to pay for the MMG-Support.

I know my statement is a bit contradictory but I can understand the need to have a clean forum without topic spammers.

Very wise!


My opinion: I agree with the opinion listed above, spammers can easily upgrade their accounts to spam. Beside, non-supporters (like me) will feel that they have lower reputation than upgraded members (Maybe unfair..)

However, you (admins) can put rules for signatures, including: font-family, font-size, font-color.. and minimize these settings to be all regular "As a result, it won't be so flashy or catchy.."
I noticed some people use really big font sizes, and like I'm forced to click their signature

Next, this may sound a stupid idea from me, but I suggest all images to be removed from signatures. Just links, like 2 lines only, 2 clickable links..something of that kind?.. a bit silly? no problem. You asked our opinions, and that was mine.

Regards,
Ahmed

I voted a big HELL YES for this idea!!
I cannot stand the useless posts, and it seems lately they are doing it like crazy!

It is hard enough for members to keep up to reporting these things, I can only imagine the work the mods have to do.
Especially when the members do not hit that report button.

I don't think people should have any reason to complain, if their main reason to come here is to have their signature noticed than I don't think they are here for any good reasons.
A nicer cleaner forum is what seperates MMG from the rest... Keep up the great work

Anyways..
I say great idea, others won't... but thats my opinion

Maybe a very high minimum post count and minimum amount of time as a registered user. A purely post count restricted signature feature would probably just produce a bunch of post-boosters, but maybe a mandatory length of time ie. a few months or something before you can use a signature.

I don't really know, ASFx, it is a hard one to completely censor.

You definitely have to restrict the size of font people can use in signatures, as those HUGE signatures are just pathetic and degrading to the forum. I think banners should be removed from signatures as GoldGuy pointed out as well. Just plain, small and noninvasive is a good restriction.

its very hard decission.. Like weiliang said



If its allow for based on the minimum post, they mostly will junk and spam on the thread..
Maybe like minimum 1 month since join date then they can be allowed to have signature and other things perhaps..

Just a simple thought!

Well, it's true spammers can easily upgrade their account just to spam, but how long will their account last once they do that? 1 day, maybe two? I think a spammer will only upgrade his MMG account so many times before he realizes he is using more money just to upgrade his account than he's making from the spamming.

I have also seen some people upgrade their account with their first post, and it's true some of them have caused problems, but they have been quickly dealt with (as long as we noticed them)

I understand not everyone knows the rules, but that's why we have the warning system in place to help people become aware of our rules. We never ban people right away unless they do something like join just to spam, or if theyre a known scammer.

what he said. i voted yes.

There is another hyip forum that I visit sometimes where they do not allow graphics in the signature. They are limited to 2 lines (and maximum amount of character) and also limit the font size and color. That way people can still advertise their referral ID or website, but it makes a much cleaner looking forum.

"Cleaner" forum or not, would that really accomplish anything? They would still have a signature and the ability to make tons of posts every day. Though abuse could still occur from upgraded members, its probably not very cost effective to be constantly upgrading new accounts when we delete all of their posts and signatures after a day or two when they get caught.

The idea that regular members can have a small, less obtrusive signature while upgraded members are allowed something a little more flashy is intriguing. This would make the spammers signatures less effective, as they stand out less than some others and it also gives people another reason to upgrade. Interesting.

I'm all for it as a member, but...

if less people post because they won't be able to spam their signature, wouldn't that decrease income from advertising and google? It might make some members become a MMG paid supporter like was mentioned, but I guess as an admin, you'd have to look at the money, if that was a concern. Maybe I'm being stupid, I don't know, shoot me if I am. (I read in another thread that is what some wanted to do to stupid people. )

One thing I would hate to see go missing is banners
People work hard on those, and they show some character.... if we all just had simple word signatures it could get boring.

I still vote yes for the initial question though.... Only upgraded members can have a signature!
Spammers will eventually stop once they see that it is costing them money, they might as well go do some real paid advertisments then...lol

Maybe another idea would be to limit them from having a link in their signature. So they can still have a message, but without a link their spamming will be useless!

yeah i love all the creative, interesting banners around. even tho i don't have one right now.

Cleaner? Don't know about that. Adds a lot more "words" And sometimes sloppy, etc.
I like banners as long as they look good and fit the purpose and are banner size not leaderboards.
Though I'd like a nice double banner with my name on it

Definately keep the banners, they make the forum colourful. Maybe disabling links in non-upgraded sigs is a good idea. I dont think i'v made any money off any of my sigs, but i like to at least advertise the sites that i'm part of.

I think limiting the size of signatures would definitely help. Everyone has come across those GIANT signatures, and know how overwhelming and in-your-face they are. Keep the size to a minimum.

Well, IMO, it's good that MMG keeps a tight ship, but then again you might lose users as well should you ceise to let them post their banners. I'd think the current rules are good for now. "If it ain't broken, isn't it the best not to fix it?"

I think we should let everyone have a signature with length size limitiation or "force" them to use short/mmg-urls.
and I prefer banner image only for supporter
this will be a fair solution.

It *is* broken to an extent, that is the reason for this thread. People are signature spamming, with giant and invasive signatures.

Personally, I don't care about using the signature. If I want to join a game (program), I will PM the person I want to join under and ask for their link.

Even though spammers can upgrade to supporter, it seems to me that it would be so much easier for the mods and admin to monitor the supporters for violations. Allow only those banners approved by the game/program it is advertising.

More votes and comments please So far the poll has been pretty even.

Ok ok I'll vote...

I don't have a problem with the signatures the way they are.

thanks for the comments and votes. Need more please

Ban giant signatures.

Dont take out what signatures was origionaly and traditionaly intended for.
Allow up to two 486-60 banners...yes.
Only allow text signatures if they contain no link.
People chat and post in other threads yes to get thier banner seen.
This is a forum for advertising isnt it?
Yeah, stupid posts are such as: I will in/have a look/maybe in/ etc.

I say send a mail to the entire database once per week asking all members to report stupid and unacceptable posts.

If you take away what is a tradition of most forums online (banners) you take away part of the fun.

I think the current rules are good as they are.

Having a banner in your sig, is fine, so long as they are the MMG allowed size.

If someone is going to have text in their sig, thats fine to, so long as its with the MMG allowed size and not some sig with a insane font size.

"have a look" "maybe in" posts are infuriating. Even when a minimum character rule was implemented they don't take a hint; the redundant posters are just adding a bunch of '..................' to it or saying 'thanks, good luck' to make the minimum post; they are merciless.

It is very annoying and degrading to the forum.

I voted yes.....


that spamming with siggis after a site has closed, is getting on my nerves

I don't like this idea at all.
From what I remember MMG is a free forum and the upgrades aren't mandatory.
New members should be blocked from adding their signatures until they are a member for 1-2 months and they have at least 100 posts.

Or maybe there should be more mods on this forum ??

More mods? That doesn't help solve the spam issue.

As much as I hate signature spam, I voted to leave things as they are.

Rather than taking privileges away from a group of members, let's start using
that REPORT button as often as it takes, gang!

These spammers have got to go.

Book 'em, Danno!

This is your big chance to voice your opinion, people!

May be this thread need to be make sticky to get more attention from members to vote?

I agreed, i believe that we cant let supportors to have all the privilegde, and many of the free members will have a different view on MMG, it may really lead people in believing that in paying as a supportor, they may spam whenever they like, i believe that it's up to mods and staff in banning these spammers out, with supporters and members helping them out...

what makes me mad that i got warnings because of some mistakes i made that didnt hurt anyone-like posting a new program not 100 percent exactly like the format needed-i think i didnt write the url of the program just the title or another time i got a warning because someone argued with me on my own thread and i answered him(or her)so i get warnings because of that yet people are continuing to post stupid stuff over the board more than a few times for same person and they are still here

I propose that whatever is decided, give it a 30-day period to take effect. During that 30 days, if members quit complaining while doing NOTHING, make the whatever change go into effect. If during that 30 days people spend a second to REPORT every lame post that says "click on my link" "see my sig" "PM me, I'm an idiot", maybe nothing needs to be changed.

I think the spam issue can be dealt with by members reporting the spam. That's not happening now best I can tell but then again I don't get reports so it's just a reasonable guess on my part. If the members aren't reporting these clowns, the only way to stop the spam is take what some would feel are too strict of measures.
Give people a chance to hit the REPORT button and make it an issue. If that doesn't work, do whatever MMG mgt feels is necessary.

NUK



You got warnings and are still here so how do you know the others also didn't get warnings that are still here? Really, I don't care who gets warnings or not as I can't see them anyway! The only way anyone knows is when someone posts "I got a warning" Who cares?

NUK

REPORT BUTTON.

And you can't see other people's warnings so you don't know if they were suspended or warned.

You said it better than I could, so....ditto.

I voted no because i think it is unfair, but there are always going to be more no votes than yes because probably they arent a paid member anyways. I bet only paid members voted for yes.

Thank you for your input everyone. So far it looks like we will not do this. We might have a better solution later.

Voted 'yes' because i'm a lifetime supporter

*selffish*

Btw. Mods and Admins do not count as MMG Supporters, do they

Yes mods and admins are also supporters

Paying for signatures isn't a good idea, IMO

A better idea would be to allow signatures only to members that have at least 2-3 months of activity on MMG.

Signatures are a form of advertising.

Charge a fee for signature advertising, separate
from the upgraded membership fee.

And maybe structure the upgrades such that only
long term supporters get free sigs, and everyone
else has to buy the sig.

Of course after buying, they can still spam, but they
will think twice about spam.

Now here is an interesting twist:
Costs for sigs:
20 posts / mo = $x.xx
100 posts / mo = $xx.xx
500 posts / mo = $xxx.xx

Comments.

but as always its your decision to click on the signature

I just voted yes, basically because I've noticed (and reported ) a lot of "click on my signature" posts lately


However, that wouldn't be fair to someone who does follows the rules, but chooses not to upgrade.


Would it be to difficult to disable signatures for only those who abuse it?

I'm not a supporter, and even I think only supporters should be able to use sigs. The ratio of irrelevant to relevant posts on MMG is getting out of hand (I'd say 5:1 is a good estimate).