[Discussion] Superman's sig - Flamebait?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-03-05 03:44pm

It has recently come to my attention that Superman has placed this image in his signature:

and created a thread here to recruit more people to adopt similar signatures. This strikes me as a blatant attempt at flamebait, perhaps inspired by recent spat Superman had with Spanky in OT.

Your thoughts?

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-03-05 04:28pm

Depends, do you have the tread title for Sups and Spanky's spat? Or a link, if their fight is a factor in this, I'd like to read it to see if it is indeed in context to the problem.

Post by **Edi** » 2006-03-05 04:36pm

Knife wrote:Depends, do you have the tread title for Sups and Spanky's spat? Or a link, if their fight is a factor in this, I'd like to read it to see if it is indeed in context to the problem.

You're missing the point, Knife. There are a lot of anime fans here, and they'll have to put up with Superman's sig in every thread he posts in, even if the topic has nothing to do with anime. It's nothing more than a shit-stirring sig-flame, much like if somebody put "<some other user's handle> is a pedophile!" in their sig.

We already have a rule against sig-flaming, so this should be a cut and dried issue.

Edi

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-03-05 04:37pm

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=86595

Even without this thread, Superman and Spanky have never really gotten along and it's hard to interpret the sig as anything other than a blatant attempt to goad anime fans into responding angrily.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-03-05 04:41pm

Never mind; I think I Foundit. If this in indeed the 'tiff' then I really don't see it as some sort of reason for Superman to 'get back' at Spanky with his sig.

For example it doesn't seem to violate DR#2;

The "vendetta" rule: pursuant to the hijacking rule, do not "follow someone around" because you dislike him, hijacking threads in which he participates in order to carry on your feud with him. This particular form of hijacking is considered the least acceptable of all hijacking offenses.

YUP #2;

As with avatars, they are subject to the approval of the staff. If the staff feels that your sig is too big, too offensive, or too annoying, you will be asked to change it. The rules for a sig are stricter than the rules for a normal post because a sig will appear on every one of your posts, both new and old.

Is subjective in that if the staff feels they are 'offensive' and what not. Is this why you started the tread, to see if it was 'offesnive'? Personally, at this point it seems like Superman just doesn't like Anime and is reflecting it in his sig. I see noting that leads me to believe he did so to pissoff Spanky or any Anime lover.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-03-05 04:44pm

I see nothing more fight provoking in that sig then I do in a number of others here; its an expression of his views on a topic. Now someone can disagree with those views and challenge him on them, but the same can be said for sigs that express any viewpoint here.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-03-05 04:44pm

Edi wrote: You're missing the point, Knife. There are a lot of anime fans here, and they'll have to put up with Superman's sig in every thread he posts in, even if the topic has nothing to do with anime. It's nothing more than a shit-stirring sig-flame, much like if somebody put "<some other user's handle> is a pedophile!" in their sig.

We already have a rule against sig-flaming, so this should be a cut and dried issue.

Edi

All it says is 'anime seriously sucks', big deal. As the rules state, it's up to the staff to interperate 'offensive' and 'annoying' and I am sure this will be the case. But, since Joe put it up for discussion, I don't think it's that big of a deal. It doesn't label 'anime fan's' as assholes, nor does it call any particular person out for being an asshole for liking anime.

It just says anime sucks.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-03-05 04:47pm

The fact that it says "shitting on Otaku," i.e. anime fans, doesn't help his case much, either.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-03-05 04:53pm

Joe wrote:The fact that it says "shitting on Otaku," i.e. anime fans, doesn't help his case much, either.

I will agree, that if Otaku means fans, then that is a good point and shouldn't be part of the sig. However, besides that, if he doesn't like Anime, then I see little problem with him expressing it as long as it is about the anime and not a person or group of persons.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2006-03-05 04:55pm

Mike's sig is a rotating bashing of various folks from Creationists to Republicans so do we say that someone who has a sig that makes good natured fun of an unpopular group on this board is OK but bash something a little more popular suddenly it's flame bait?

Personally it doesn't bother me that much - afterall if anime fans can be insulted by something as childish as that then they need to buy a sense of humor - but I can see the concern. Mine is that if we're going after people that have sigs that are insulting to a nebulous group ie. Anime fans then we should be just as even handed in our approach to people's sigs that attack far less sacred cows on here like Bush or Republicans or whatever.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-03-05 05:22pm

Joe wrote:The fact that it says "shitting on Otaku," i.e. anime fans, doesn't help his case much, either.

Its freaking joke Joe. And a funny one at that. Look at the VP sig "ASS is spreading, help us make it whole". Its just an ass related joke.

Hell, I'm suprised he didn't go the anal sex route for a pun, but there you are.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-03-05 06:08pm

Superman has removed the "Shitting on Otakus" part. That makes the sig just a statement of his opinion on an animation style. I initially thought the sig was flamebait, but between the arguments Ender and Stravo have made and the fact he removed the part that was directly insulting people, I think it's within bounds now.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-03-05 06:25pm

I wish I could feel the same way, but IMO the "Shitting on Otakus" part taints the signature, and removing it after the fact does little to alter my impression that the signature was meant to be flamebait.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2006-03-05 07:20pm

Frankly, it comes off as nothing but a blatant and childish attempt to goad other members. Sorry, it's flamebait.

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2006-03-05 07:26pm

Stravo wrote:Mike's sig is a rotating bashing of various folks from Creationists to Republicans so do we say that someone who has a sig that makes good natured fun of an unpopular group on this board is OK but bash something a little more popular suddenly it's flame bait?

Personally it doesn't bother me that much - afterall if anime fans can be insulted by something as childish as that then they need to buy a sense of humor - but I can see the concern. Mine is that if we're going after people that have sigs that are insulting to a nebulous group ie. Anime fans then we should be just as even handed in our approach to people's sigs that attack far less sacred cows on here like Bush or Republicans or whatever.

I agree completely. It's not attacking anime fans, or anyone in particular, just anime itself. You can't compare this to a personal attack on someone by calling them a pedophile.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-03-05 08:01pm

I'm an anime fan, and I'm not offended.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2006-03-05 09:04pm

It is flamebait, but I dont give a shit.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-03-06 01:33am

No. In its current form it does not attack an individual and is simply an expression of opinion on cartoon style.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2006-03-06 01:45am

I watch the occasional anime, and I don't find that sig picture to be particularly offensive, and certainly not anything that would incite flamewars on its own. Now if it said "Anime fans/Spanky are/is a shit-eating douchebag(s)" then I'd say, by all means, brutally oppress the damned thing and be done with it . . . but, as it is now, it's just another sig pic. Potential flamebait, maybe, but right now, it's nothing really worth giving a shit over.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2006-03-06 09:09pm

I hate anime style with a passion. It has seeped into SW Insider depictions of Jedi, and it makes me seriously reconsider renewing my subscription. If Supes isn't attacking any one person, I say it should stay.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-03-06 10:23pm

I don't consider it flamebait, but then again, much like Wayne, I dislike anime myself.

Kuroneko · Post by **Kuroneko** » 2006-03-06 10:41pm

On one hand, SirNitram is correct...

SirNitram wrote:Frankly, it comes off as nothing but a blatant and childish attempt to goad other members.

On the other, it's not personal, and fans of any genre should have more self-control than to flame an opinion on something that's purely a matter of taste. It's a non-issue.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-03-06 11:26pm

I'm not sure it goads anyone that isn't already predisposed to be easily baited (I believe Spanky's name hs come up in this discussion already?) and seriously, Stravo brought up an equally good point about Mike's sig and noone calling that flamebait.

I think its worth remembering that on this board you're generally expected to develop a thick skin on most topics. While some topics invariably will be considered flamebait due to their nature, anime is not in and of itself a serious enough subject to, in my opinion, get really all that riled up over.

And for the record, I do think its kinda funny.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2006-03-07 09:37am

The original one kind of annoyed me but I see nothing wrong with the current one.

Publius · Post by **Publius** » 2006-03-08 03:30pm

It is worth pointing out that people's religion and political beliefs are routinely denigrated on this board, even outside meaningful discussions on the relative merits thereof. There is a certain level of thickness of skin to be expected of all members of this community; if Mr. Wong does not feel it is contrary to his board's rules to use his signature to mock ideas he feels are foolish, then it is more than likely that Superman is within his rights to mock an art genre he dislikes.