Regarding sigs

[scottish]

If a signature is too bit, inappropriate or for whatever other reason they are removed, why edit it and leave a message?

I've never understood this, why not remove it and PM them, you don't need to inform everyone else on the forum that something which is no longer there is inappropriate, too big etc, only the user who has the signature in the first place.

Presumably they are PM'd already, so it's pointless leaving a mod edit in the signature..

Remove them from any signatures that currently have it and don't do it in future, just remove it and PM them.

[lemons]

i agree they're very ugly to look at

[David]

yeah phil what were you thinking mate

[Aiden]

i like them
it's like an orange community suit for online

[karter]

not to mention when you remove the warnings from the sign they warn you again like.....that's so stupid
what is the point of this...what are you thinking mods

[e5]

It's up to the user whether they replace the signature with something else or their choice to keep it to be honest. Although I'm game for not adding one and just sticking to PMing

[scottish]

Yeah I'm aware, but there's no point putting the edit in there in the first place, as you're removing the offending material and PMing the user.

I don't see the need to leave an edit in a signature.

[e5]

Yeah I'm aware, but there's no point putting the edit in there in the first place, as you're removing the offending material and PMing the user.

I don't see the need to leave an edit in a signature.

Phil is back around half 8 so I'm sure he'll comment then and make a decision

[lawrawrrr]

It's kind of a 'badge of honour' for some people who deliberately break rules to have one as well! I think just PMing would be fine, personally

[scottish]

If people are that sad then even more reason to take it off them.

It's unanimous we're removing it @Phil; do your thing