Plugin for signatures?

(Charles Walter) #14

@sam. I respect your thoughts on this. I just want you to keep in mind that our audience is very passionate about this. Meaning they will insert their signatures (animated GIFs) manually in the meantime. So, by not putting the signature in a separate field where it can be handled properly, we are forcing the rest of our community to see them.


“We are the essence of what we DO! The part we each play in the cosmos. Doing good deeds for others is leaving our signature on the world.” ― Angie Karan

1 Like

(Rafael dos Santos Silva) #15

This would be a very cool plugin to make, but I not 100% I can handle it alone. :pokerface:

@eviltrout we have a outlet inside the post that we can use to achieve signatures?

1 Like

(Robin Ward) #16

Sure, I can add that. Where would you want it to be?

2 Likes

(Mittineague) #17

Other than the one that’s already in post.hbs?

</article>

{{post-gap post=this postStream=controller.model.postStream before="false"}}
{{plugin-outlet "post-bottom"}}
2 Likes

(Holden) #18

I agree. I think signatures are old-fashioned, just create clutter and don’t contribute to a conversation in any way. If someone says something interesting, I’ll view their card or click through to their profile to find out more about them.

I’m glad Discourse doesn’t have signatures.

5 Likes

(Charles Walter) #19

@holden, if users started manually pasting signatures in their posts, wouldn’t you want the ability to turn those off? By not having a signature field, users in our community are looking to start pasting them into the body of their messages. My suggestion is to make displaying the signatures a user preference (default to not display)



“We are the essence of what we DO! The part we each play in the cosmos. Doing good deeds for others is leaving our signature on the world.” ― Angie Karan

0 Likes

(Rafael dos Santos Silva) #20

I think the one we have right now is good to show ads but for sigs it’s kinda strange for then to be after the post controls.

What about after the .cooked and before the .post-menu-area ?

0 Likes

(Mittineague) #21

When that happens, a Moderator edits the Fake Signature out of the post and the member is asked to not do it again.

2 Likes

(Charles Walter) #22

@mittineague quite authoritative, but not practical with 6K+ messages per day. It would also make the users angry. I am a bit miffed why people would object to a signature field that is optional for users to enable for display. Other than the obvious work that the feature/plugin would entail to develop. If users want to enable the option, and it doesn’t impact others, I would think it’s a win/win.

0 Likes

(Rafael dos Santos Silva) #23

Yeah, and I think we all agree that sigs are bad. But you don’t take then away after decades and blame the software. Cultural changes like this can be harmful to the community. With a plugin you can make then smaller each quarter so things are a bit smoother.

5 Likes

(Holden) #24

Hi @charleswalter Sorry, I misunderstood you. Giving users the ability to toggle sigs is a great idea if sigs are turned on.

Just saying, imo the internet would be a better place if sigs didn’t exist.

I can’t stand them from a design pov, which is one of the many reasons why I like Discourse so much.

And I can’t stand them from a users pov because I get so tired of seeing the same old sigs over and over. My brain just shuts them out like it does ads. I’m guessing this happens to most people, so what’s the point of having them take up so much space?

4 Likes

(Holden) #25

But I hear what you guys are saying – your community wants them, so you want to make them happy, which is good :smile:

2 Likes

(Erlend Sogge Heggen) #26

Whatever space it is that the Translator ++ plugin is using seems to be ideal for this as well.

1 Like

(loopback0 - TDWTF) #27

And what when they’re turned off? The users will do the same.

This solves nothing, and having a signature that’s multiple times the size of the post isn’t proving that signatures are a good idea IMO.

The usercard is essentially the same thing - and it’s completely optional for people seeing it, because they need to click it. It supports big, animated images, and other information.

7 Likes

(Jeff Atwood) #28

It’s not something we are interested in building at this time.

We’d actually prefer that you switch to different discussion software rather than being forced to build this. Even if that means you are no longer a customer.

I just want to be absolutely crystal clear about our stance on this. We view signatures as harmful, like smoking, something we don’t want to ever encourage or support in any way.

That said, if you contract with a third party to build a plugin, that’s none of our business.

19 Likes

(Charles Walter) #30

@codinghorror I had a feeling you’d say something like that. if you prefer moving this thread to marketplace, I’m cool with that.

1 Like

(Jeff Atwood) #31

Probably better if you solidify feedback here into a tighter marketplace topic, with a list of desired features, budget, UI mockups, etc.

3 Likes

(Rafael dos Santos Silva) #32

He’s using the same place I suggested, so that’s one more vote for an outlet after .cooked :thumbsup:

4 Likes

(Kane York) #33

OK, added the plugin outlet: FEATURE: post-after-cooked plugin-outlet by riking · Pull Request #3729 · discourse/discourse · GitHub

4 Likes

(Rafael dos Santos Silva) #34

Thanks!

I’ll try to hack together a basic implementation this weekend:

  • Users Custom text field where you can add an URL image
  • Display images below posts using the outlet

If everything goes well we can upgrade the system to cover all aspects.

@charleswalter What about turning the first post into a wiki so we can put the spec there?

0 Likes