Signature Blocks. (Keeping Walts out.)

Discussion in 'ARRSE: Site Issues' started by Verbal-Rebuke, Oct 24, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I've had stacks of PM's over the last few hours, people like the signature block & think that it is a good idea. Thank you for the comments. :wink:

    My reason for using it is quite simple..............................walts are taking over...............I've been lurking on the forums for a while & it makes me laugh to see some of the drivel that flows in certain threads. :lol:

    A number of people have approached me with the idea that serving & ex could be identified by certain sig blocks.

    I am uncertain how this could be done, is it possible???? :?:

    If you're sick of walts invading our area get your thinking heads on! :idea:

    Come on lets get ARRSE back into the hands of serving & ex............................or am I being petty?

    If I am I'll feck off & play somewhere else.
     
  2. I'm afraid you'll be pishing in the wind. The site isn't aimed at us any more. :roll:
     
  3. well if you could supply a service number securely to the admin via your email then maybe you can get a certain sig block. Maybe linked to your Regt/Corps/Ship/Station/ACF unit. At least then it might be possible to separate someone like me ( ex radop in TA) from a regular signaller etc.

    Would have to be done securely and then details deleted by the admin once they have given you your signature.

    Just an idea but depends on how much work this would create for admin and whether it would slow the server down too much.

    stab
     
  4. I agree with Flash, but if it was possible, then maybe there could be a way of entering your service and or number into a secure database, that could if need be be checked? This could (i think) be linked to a standard signature block that would be displayed to state if you were serving or ex forces.......

    The only problems I see with this would be forums like the ACF, where as the Adults have "pay numbers" the Cadets that take part don't have numbers?

    Regards
     
  5. Maybe this could be linked to giving money to the site! You could pay via PayPal say £1.00 to have your details "checked" and the new signature block added?
     
  6. Yeah you will be able to recoise most of the Inf guys by this peice of paper, cheers Labour!

    [​IMG]
     
  7. You could try having an invitation only section or level to the forum.
    Ok this would exclude me but if it works for you guys then whatever.
    just a civvys 2p

    yetanother edit : another user level above generic but without admin/mod rights these forum areas could be made read only to generic users if wanted - one for the Co s :D
     
  8. If this does come in, then cadets and AI's should not have the same signature block as ex and serving soldiers, anyway.
     
  9. Or just use ArmyNET for pro work issues?
     
  10. I'm a civvie. I like it here, it provides a great insight into the British Army that most civvies would never have access to. A lot of potential recruits do use the Training wing, Junior, and Health and Fitness forums, where would they fit in if you wanted to kick out the civvies?

    I've always found Arrse rather funny, but have always known that as a civvie I am a guest. Despite making a pleb out of myself here and there I have never done it with the express intention that it should make Arrse the poorer for it. Should the members ever have made it clear that it was Armed Forces only I would not hesitate to oblige.
     
  11. Can't see the problem - any walts who try it on here get sussed out pretty much instantly by any proper serving or ex mil anyway. Then it's a case of FORUM! 300! WALT IN OPEN! RRRRAAAPPID FIIIIIRRRRRE !!!!
     
  12. And what about these people? And the genuine onlookers and journos who have either the apt knowledge or provided a valuable contribution to a few of the CA threads or issues?
     
  13. Chaps, I think you are all missing the point. The whole idea of Arrse was to be an anonymous forum for squaddies with virtually no way of identifying who was who (unless you wanted to).

    Would any of you want to give a civvy website your military details?? I don’t think so.

    We have to accept that this place will be full of the 'Guns N Ammo' types, the walts and the SCHs. Its free, it's public and it's popular. No way of getting around it.

    This has been done to death in the moderator’s forum and no practical solution has arrived. There is no way Arrse will ever become a closed, members only website and the chance of a stricter vetting process being implemented is zero.

    Accept the fact that we have to mix with civpop. They are quite easy to spot and it's actually immense fun baiting the plebs to the point that they self harm.

    Verbal, a valiant effort for someone who is 'new' ;) but it aint going to change.

    Why don’t you start up your own site and have membership criteria? I'll guarantee virtually no squaddies would sign up if they had to give their details. Just look at Armynet!!
     
  14. The idea behind the sig block was NOT to stop civvies from using ARRSE, no doubt a large percentage of civilians make a very good contribution to the site.

    My gripe is that certain ARRSErs claim to be serving, or ex, in short polluting the site with a load of tosh. The sig block would only be a way of knowing who you're talking to.

    I know that ARRSE can be a great insight for the civilian population at large, with many prospective young recruits surfing in for advice etc.

    However if serving & ex had sig blocks, the people who are seeking advice, especially in the Training Wing, would know if they were taking to someone in the know, rather than a Walter Mitty.
     
  15. elovabloke

    elovabloke LE Moderator

    An the reason everyone knows VR's not a walt is????????????