Rate that signature!

[Shrooblord]

But I'm Dutch and in my scientific study I see both , and . used randomly interchangably and now I confuses and nooo don't hit me im sorrryyyy

[Bradandez]

@Ad: You really think so?

[Snagglebee]

@Shroob: 9/10

[incognito]

Emshomar : 7/10.

[Snagglebee]

6/10, principles.

[DandyGuy]

8/10 political reasons

[Dart]

8.25/10

[Bradandez]

7/10

[PluMGMK]

Brad: 10/10!

[Serza5]

Rate the sig above you from 1/10 and a reason why.

Why do you people keep forgetting this rule? I thought I have solved that issue long ago but then I come back to see you lot are spamming with just the rating.

Plum get's 5/10 for his eyesore of a sick and only gets points for being colourful.

[technology4617]

Why do you people keep forgetting this rule? I thought I have solved that issue long ago but then I come back to see you lot are spamming with just the rating.

Meh, rules can change over time, and I personally don't think explanations are always necessary, particularly when those reasons are hard to put into words (which can happen quite often in this context).

I also wouldn't call it "spam," since the posts do still serve a specific purpose, even without reasons. For example, movie parental ratings are still considered useful to the parents, even if they don't list reasons for the rating (which they actually didn't do until around the 1990s), since they still serve as a guide as to whether their children should see it or not.

[Adsolution]

I still agree with Serza though, it's far more interesting to know why a signature receives a particular rating. Everyone clearly has a reason for why they think something, so why not share it to make things more interesting? Ratings to me personally mean very little if there's no reason, and don't tell me people are having trouble coming up with reasons for why they like/dislike a signature image of all things.

Rules can change over time, but pure laziness isn't an acceptable reason. A lot of game threads are turning into dumping grounds of utter nonsense (Lie To Me, In My Pants, The Pwnage Game (LoveMetal even suggested that you all use images instead of words, but nope)) that people put no effort in to whatsoever, and that's just sad.

[Serza5]

Essentially what Ads said. Topics can have meaning but still be a spam thread. The BONK thread being one of the more better examples as while sometimes people can be creative with what they say most of the time it's just people repeating the word "Bonk" plus one other thing.

Ratings, while they do have meaning, are not only just numbers but can easily be abused as people can just go "Uh what number to give them? Ah this one will do" without putting thought into it, or try to "troll" people by giving them low ratings for no reason.

[technology4617]

Bleh, not disagreeing that ratings with reasons provided are more useful (this goes along with the movie ratings example I provided as well); my point was more that I didn't think ratings without reasons were "bad," per se, since they still served a purpose, albeit being less useful than those that provided reasons.

That being said, I'm not at all opposed to this rule being put into place, since it would ensure more responses in the more useful category.

[Shrooblord]

Ads gets 9/10 for drawings and creepy floaty heads!

[Bradandez]

9/10 for Shrooblord for he animates his signatures that are rather nice to stare at.

[Rayman fan2000]

10/10 because it's so amazingly colorful.

[RAYMANIA]

To Conker give 7/10 because I find it.. Different

[Bradandez]

8/10 Very iconic event from Rayman 2.

[rolesfamily]

7.5/10

When I first saw it I actually didn't like it that much, but I've warmed up to it! It's very you, and I like your style. It's unique, and that's what makes it stand out in a good way! I also like the bright colours, especially that waterfall thing on mountain is pretty cool.