Lack of signature members is a issue for me and think that this discussion as become very lopsided, so I have pointed Yobit towards this thread to voice their concerns here. Tired of seeing the same people clapping each other on the back acting like their is no other opinions in a discussion. So we shall see if the signature is meek,timid and voiceless in due time.

Before I get full hog tied,I endorse the idea of Full member and up for signatures but a out right ban seems short sighted and with out stats can not be discussed with a rational mind.
Lets not forget that one of the favorite tactics in this forum is to state "You have a signature,therefore your opinion is paid for and is just spam"! Dismissive and a tad arrogant because we are all equal human beings and this need for a dynasty of 1% seems like a game where the forum will not prosper. I know a lot of you feel the opposite but wheres the proof?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This seems to be the talking point as of late about signature users talking a lot but saying nothing. Can it be more that you do not agree with what is being stated and this is a way to cut the person off? Can you show me some examples of these type of posts because I think the people still posting crap are not changing the format. May be a handful of users that are doing this but as a whole very few are posting pages.

Who is he

Great signature campaign!

Do ISIS use Bitcoin ?

waiting for this faucet ON

Not sure if you're trying to pad your post count, or just replying with incomplete knowledge.

By quoting, I am verifying that this is the original unedited message, to prevent a hacker from editing the message which his own address and signature.   
Since I have quoted it, even if it is edited, anybody can look at the text within my quote and verify it themselves.

This is the exact same reason Gavin's testimony about Craig Wright's signature being true was not worth listening to. Signing is supposed to mean that you don't take anybody's word and verify it yourself. You should not take my word that the signature is right, and verify it yourself. By quoting, my job is not to ensure that the signature is correct, but just that the signature has not been changed since it was posted.

Also, I assume this may have been looked at before but maybe ranking in general could be based on the word count or character count of posts as opposed to the quantity of them?  Maybe too resource intensive?

Quoted for proof.

He probably just wants to stay on the safe site to ensure that no one can impersonated him in case there is a rogue user posing as him here.