Topics

locked Message signatures when viewing the archives

 

Hi All,

This came up in another thread, but I wanted to bring it into its own thread to hopefully get more eyeballs on it. The issue is message signatures, and whether signatures should be displayed when viewing the archives. My feeling is that, especially when viewing a thread with a couple of people responding to each other, that seeing the same signatures over and over is not a good experience. Repetition and page bloat. My initial thought was to always try to collapse all signatures. But perhaps there's something else that could be done instead. Maybe I extract signatures and display a link next to a person's name that when clicked pops up a dialog box with the signature? Combine the signature with a person's profile when viewing the profile? Something else?

Thanks,
Mark

Duane
 

I think the only sig that should show online in each post is the one for the person that posted/replied. Unfortunately, mine gets collapsed with the others if I top post because it's automatically inserted below the quote by default on a reply. "Simply" moving it above the quote would work for me.

I seldom use email, so wouldn't see the sigs there. It would probably be a lot more difficult on email replies because location could vary with the program used.

Duane

 

I agree with both of Duane's responses here. There are two issues:

(1) the signature is subsumed within the ellipses within a top post, which makes the auto signature feature worthless for people who use email; and

(2) which signatures should remain onlist. I agree with Duane that one signature (the one for the person posting the particular reply) should remain onlist. I see no point in having more than that. However, at this point none show up if the reply was via email, because of the collapsing.

I have been asking for awhile that the sig be pulled out of the quote and have assumed that's it's either difficult or the seriousness of the problem has not gotten through. I have no idea which it is. But failing the sig showing up, the auto signature for email is, I maintain, a worthless (and, worse, misleading) feature.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

p.s. Mark wrote in the original thread about this: "The other issue is whether signatures should be displayed when viewing the archives."

In general the sigs do really need to be displayed in the archives, if you're not talking about duplicates, for the reasons I mentioned: (a) some groups require them; (b) some groups include a lot of information in the sigs that is necessary to have easily available when reading the post; (c) if you're going to have an auto sig feature, then automatically removing the sigs would, I think, confuse the heck out of people.

I think the link idea is good for the groups that require informational sigs, but I think that should be optional per group.

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:38 AM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

I agree with both of Duane's responses here. There are two issues:


Please let's keep this thread on topic. We're just talking about whether a person's sig should be shown in the archives, and if so, how that should be done.

Thanks,
Mark 

 

Pie in the sky would be that the sig links to a row in a database. But I know that's not going to happen. :-)
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:47 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Please let's keep this thread on topic

Apologies. I was responding to Duane and thought it was on topic.  
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

Here's another idea when viewing message archives on the web. Show a person's signature the first time it appears on the page, and collapse it whenever it repeats. That is, if two people are furiously replying to each other in a thread, you'll see their signatures on the first two posts, and their signatures in the remaining posts on that page will be collapsed by default. Anyone reading a single message at a time will always see the signatures.

JohnF

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 06:34 pm, JohnF wrote:
Anyone reading a single message at a time will always see the signatures.

I don't understand this. If I want to read a message somewhere in the middle of the thread, I wouldn't see the signature. ? 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 06:40 pm, J_catlady wrote:
I don't understand this. If I want to read a message somewhere in the middle
of the thread, I wouldn't see the signature. ? 
Yes, if you're in thread view, so you're seeing all the messages in the thread (or if they're paged), then you'll see a user's signature on their first message on the page, and for every message from that user after that, the signature will be collapsed, so you'll have to press something to see it.

If you're in single message view, then obviously, the message will always be the first (and only) one on the page, so the same rule says you'll see the signature on every message.

JohnF

 

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 09:35 am, JohnF wrote:
If you're in single message view, then obviously, the message will always be the first (and only) one on the page, so the same rule says you'll see the signature on every message.

That's an interesting idea but seems complicated. You're saying the signature displayed would depend on which view the user is in? I have the impression that a message in the archive is a message in the archive, and is a fixed entity. Either the signature would be included in it or not. But maybe your idea is doable. I don't know. Also, in a thread, the system would have to keep track of which members are posting for the first or non-first time within that thread. Maybe I'm a pessimist but this seems overly complicated....although, nice idea.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.

 

Mark,

The issue is message signatures, and whether signatures should be
displayed when viewing the archives.
As mentioned in the older thread, I say definitely yes when in "Single View".

My feeling is that, especially when viewing a thread with a couple of
people responding to each other, that seeing the same signatures over
and over is not a good experience.
I don't have as strong an opinion about it in Thread View.

But perhaps there's something else that could be done instead. Maybe I
extract signatures and display a link next to a person's name that when
clicked pops up a dialog box with the signature?
In thread view you could extract the sig and put it as hover text over some "sig icon' at the bottom of the message. Alas, I didn't see a good candidate at Font Awesome, I was thinking about something that looks like a fountain pen tip with a bit of inkline extending from it.

A geeky icon would be "-- " with an outline around it. About the size of the elipses button, but not blue (because I want it to be hover, not click).

Speaking of which, please, if possible use a hover text, not a dialog (there's no "dialog" here, just an info display). I already hate that I have to click on "liked this" notice and then dismiss the dialog just to see who liked something.

Ok, it is better than I thought. I just discovered I can dismiss the dialog without moving between clicks. Still, the pop-up that dims the rest of the page feels too modal and disruptive when I'm just reading messages.

This is similar to JohnF's idea (#10456), but without the extra complication of showing each member's sig the first time and collapsing it on the second and later occurrences.

Shal