PDA

View Full Version : Bold Option



Mrs. Lyfing
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 02:19 PM
Hello, :)...

I was wondering if someone went and edited my posting in bold or did it just simply disappear..?

If using bold caps is a problem then it shouldn't be an option. And, I hope no one is going to come back and tell me I can't use bold. :-O

Pino
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 02:29 PM
uh oh, are we going to have a new rule for no Bold writing then sombody starts doing all there posts in Arabic in protest as there is no rule against that and then sombody gets offended as Arab suicide bombers killed a distant relitive?

*runs out of thread quickly*

Sigurd
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 03:27 PM
Technically, if somebody did edit out bold writing, then they'd only be doing something that was consistent with our rules:


17. The abuse of block letters, fonts, colors, other text attributes, and smilies is not permitted. Abuse consists in using them for purposes other than occasional accentuation.

Now we usually do apply this rule strictly, but considering that I believe you have consistently used colour and/or bold font with very few exceptions, I suppose a case could be made that it is as integral to your style as using the Book Antiqua font is to ladybright's posts, or the blue Arial is to lei.talk posts and your use of such could thus be discussed and sanctioned.

Also, if somebody did edit it, it would usually read a "last edited by" line if it was edited by any other person that you. Otherwise, you maybe just forgot to click the bold button and nobody can be blamed for it. Sometimes we forget about our routines, it happens. :shrug

Also, could you maybe specify which post in particular you are talking about, so I can get a clear picture of it? :)

Mrs. Lyfing
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 03:32 PM
Yes, Sigurd...it was in the polygamy thread...the last few posts I made in it. I am absolutely positively sure it was in bold, I looked it over several times, even last night rereading what I had written.

If it was edited there is no edited on the bottom and if it was edited I feel that is not right as you said because many other members don't just use plain text. And, I have never seen their's being changed.
:)

Siebenbürgerin
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 06:27 PM
Hmm, I haven't seen any posts entirely in colour here, so maybe it's an automatic thing to convert everything alike? Because if you use black colour for example it isn't readable on the dark styles, and if you use white colour it isn't readable on the white styles.

The options for bold, italic, underline and colors are there if the user wants to emphasize a part of the post, not for the whole post. Bold is needed for titles. At university it's acceptable to put title in bold, but never the whole papers. But the options mustn't be abused. If someone used the highlight button on all the posts then it would leave the eyes sore!

Sigurd
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 07:15 PM
We have discussed this matter amongst Staff, and the general consensus at this point is alas that using the bold option, or colours excessively is probably not favourable, but using alternative fonts is for the most part a non-issue.

Siebenbürgerin has pointed out here already the issue of writing in a colour which is other than the standard colour: It does not get automatically converted to the standard on other skins, which may make it impossible to read a post on a certain skin. Let's say that you wrote in pink and I used a hypothetical pink forum skin, I would not be able to read your posts without highlighting them with my mouse. In addition, I had entirely forgotten, that this was the rationale under which we'd told lei.talk that his writing in blue was inacceptable.

As regards the bold option - when discussing it, a very good point was brought up about this. If someone wrote in bold or italics, it may not seem particularly out of place, but

Imagine a person consistently wrote in underlining. It would be a thing that would be disturbing the aesthetics of the eye quite considerably. And well, let's face it, someone *will* argue at some point that if bold writing and italic writing is permitted, then surely underlined writing should not be an issue at all.

Now underlining one or two paragraphs in underlining may still look fairly alright, as would any other type of writing....

...but can you start to see what happens if you write paragraph after paragraph in underlining?

It most certainly does hurt your eyes, especially so on a solid skin. Try it for yourself if in doubt. Write a post just in underlining, then check out the "Preview Post" button. You will find that it looks very unaesthetic.

As such, we are so far generally in the agreement that using bold, italic or underlined writing should be used for accentuation only, rather than writing one's post entirely in such a style.

However using any of the fonts the forum comes with in a consistent manner is for th emost part a non-issue, though aesthetical standards do apply.

As such, writing in Book Antiqua orwriting in Comic Sans MS, even writing in a font I personally find very unaesthetic, that being Arial Black (which actually appears to imitate the bold option a little for those who like their writing a little thicker ;)) might be permitted, however mixing all types of fonts in one post is likewise not permitted.

If the consensus changes to allow you to use your trademark bold writing then we shall let you know in due course. :)

Mrs. Lyfing
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 08:06 PM
Ya'lls excuses are lame at the least. I am not underlining everything...and I am not writing a paper for school. I am not choosing colors which are to loud. And, if a staff member edited the post they did not say so at the bottom as they should. I have used red fonts many a times and it isn't a problem, nor was lei talk's blue fonts...so what is the difference when comparing that to bold?!?!

I don't think a member should be told how/or what they can choose for their posting style...

That's a little over the top....;)

Sigurd
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 08:16 PM
As I said, I had entirely forgotten that we'd told lei.talk to change his fonts from his trademark blue under the specifications of Rule #17, which he then did. Had he not been told to change his, then we might have come to a different conclusion when discussing your bold type. :)

Considering the wording of Rule #17, I feel we're already being leniant if we let people use a font of their choice, and going away to discuss that which technically goes against the Rules.

I will stress once more that I personally have no problem with your usage of the bold font, which is why I suggested discussion of the matter. However, I am afraid we have to be consistent. :shrug

Mrs. Lyfing
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 08:20 PM
Well thanks for your help S, but I won't be told how to post considering that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard...and I hope lei talk didn't bow down to such an outrageous rule...

I guess my posting here is done so ya'll won't have to worry about editing my posts anymore.

Later :wave

Sigurd
Friday, January 16th, 2009, 08:32 PM
Alright, see you back in a while then. I don't think you should leave over such a trivial matter as this, but I'm confident that we'll see a good soul like yourself will be unable to kick the habit of visiting Skadi in the long run. ;)

Mrs. Lyfing
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 12:22 AM
It is a trivial argument, but I think I make a good point...You might say to yourself " geeez what does this girl care so much about whether she can or can not use bold italics." Well, I care because for months and months I used the italics....now I went to using bold....when using the italics my posts were never edited. Do you see how ya'lls rules contradict themselves..? If I or anyone else was never allowed to use them in a full post then that would be better than letting some get away with, and letting some getting away with a couple and then saying No completely to another. ;) It doesn't make much sense to me. Does using bold, italics or underlining cost the forum extra money..? If so, I can understand a bit better. If not than it should not be a rule. Maybe everyone doesn't want to use plain ole' text...obviously since they don't. So, for you to say I can't but they can does not cut it for me.

If that isn't clear and correct I must be imagining this whole thing....:)

Hauke Haien
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 12:41 AM
Well, I care because for months and months I used the italics....now I went to using bold....when using the italics my posts were never edited. Do you see how ya'lls rules contradict themselves..?
Please point out the contradiction in the rules (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=2729). Your previous use of italics is simply a rule violation that has not been acted on. Now that the matter has escalated to the use of a more disruptive style, this has changed. Also feel free to use the report button in order to notify us of similar rule violations from other users.

Siebenbürgerin
Saturday, January 17th, 2009, 01:52 AM
Mrs. Lyfing, this isn't a complaint section or a drama section. We explained to you why you can't use bold. You accepted the rules at registration. If you didn't like this rule, you shouldn't have clicked you accept in the first place.

I close this thread now.