Is This An Acceptable Signature?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Top,,
Don't leave here over this..
Me and everyone else here loves your posts...
I go out of my way to read them,,
even if on a subject I'm not into enough to post on..
I loved the whole knife making thread...
I'd give anything to be able to show you my knife collection...
Very cool..

Teddy
 
"Be Polite. Be Professional. But have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

The Key Word here is "Kill". It's a scary word and must be taken in context. I took TR's signature to mean "Be Prepared". Another TR (Teddy Roosevelt) had a signature line that went "Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick". Rocket is another scary word to many people as it can conjure up images of death and destruction. It all depends on the context.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kill
 
Would you like to see the PM i sent the signature owner and the moderator? I got NO response from the moderator and a hostile response from the owner of the signature
 
I don't use the signature part.
There is enough without it.
Put it on your profile page, as all about me.
Keep the forums clean for the posts.
Not naming names, but some have massive info below a smile face eating popcorn for a post.
Isn't that a waste of space?
I think your avitar is a good representation of whom you are.
I'm an underdog where rocketry is concerned because I rely totally on the forum for advancing my skills (And Apogee Website)
And sweet Polly Pure Bread is my wife, now Manager of the local Stonehouse Breads Bakery.
If ya want to know more, just ask. I ain't shy.
 
Would you like to see the PM i sent the signature owner and the moderator? I got NO response from the moderator and a hostile response from the owner of the signature

I don't think I want to see the discussion. I am curious what you thought of the signature and why. And also, now that you have read the responses to your question about whether we all think it is an acceptable signature, what is your interpretation of those answers? Do the people who responded generally agree or disagree with your feelings about the signature? What do you think about the responses?
 
I don't think I want to see the discussion. I am curious what you thought of the signature and why. And also, now that you have read the responses to your question about whether we all think it is an acceptable signature, what is your interpretation of those answers? Do the people who responded generally agree or disagree with your feelings about the signature? What do you think about the responses?

I agree. I am more interested in BigRiJoe's interpretation of the thread.
Also, I would be encouraged if I saw an apology to TopRamen from BK for editing the sigline. I view it as an inappropriate way of dealing with the situation.
 
Maybe it's time to blow the lid off all content in posts, and those who can't handle it need to leave.
 
I'm just curious about one thing: what type of person walks around acting polite,but down deep assumes that everyone he or she meets wants to kill them?
 
A person in a combat zone. In a modern war zone even the 8 year old approaching you with a flower could actually be a threat. In that context it makes sense, as unfortunate as it is.

To be clear I'm sure those people don't walk into a local school and assume one of the teachers is a threat and determine how to take them out. But I'm also sure if there is a student or unfamiliar adult with a gun hidden in there waist band and a nervous look on their face these people will be the first to notice and have a plan of action to save lives.
 
Last edited:
I'm just curious about one thing: what type of person walks around acting polite,but down deep assumes that everyone he or she meets wants to kill them?

Police, soldiers and rocketry forum moderators.
 
I'm just curious about one thing: what type of person walks around acting polite,but down deep assumes that everyone he or she meets wants to kill them?

It is not an assumption that everyone wants to kill them.

When you are driving your car, you don't assume that every car that you see is going to run into you but you still must assess the risk that they pose to you. It is simply a part of being a responsible driver. We check off most of them nearly unconsciously as posing negligible risk. As they become more likely to encounter our route of travel, the risk they pose increases and we pay them more attention. As we notice their actions becoming more hazardous, we begin to develop an action plan to mitigate the risk they pose to us. Many people don't take notice until the threat is imminent and can only react to the situation. Others make a plan of action so that they can be proactive and avoid the hazard all together.

The afore mentioned sign line is no different. It is not an assumption that everyone wants to kill them, it is a recognition that there is always a hazard. Most of the time that hazard is extremely low. If we simply take this for granted and assume that it will always be so, we put ourselves and those around us at risk.

It may sound a bit like paranoia to some but if you walk a mile in TopRamen's boots, you will understand. Anyone who has seved even a short hitch in the military can speak volumes on Composite Risk Management. It doesn't take long for it to become a part of your every day thinking.
 
Very well said, screaminhelo. To continue your driving analogy, when people start riding motorcycles in traffic, their eyes are opened. They become much more aware of the hazards and learn to see and assess them much earlier.
 
Here is the question that bugs me. Folks here are not stupid, yet they continue to do things like this "signature" that they know will push a button and generate controversy. Why do they do that? Yes, the line in question may have strong personal appeal to the person who originally applied it, however they had to know that not everyone served in the military or in a role where the context of that statement made sense. Somehow I don't think that if politeness does not work on the range, killing the person who is obstructing your enjoyment is on the option list. I begin to think folks do this simply to garner attention.

It may sound a bit like paranoia to some but if you walk a mile in TopRamen's boots, you will understand. Anyone who has seved even a short hitch in the military can speak volumes on Composite Risk Management. It doesn't take long for it to become a part of your every day thinking.

I wore a uniform for twelve years and to this day do not walk around thinking that I am at constant risk. I will admit my service was peacetime and maritime in nature so I don't have the mindset that comes with facing combat, however I just grow weary of fellow vets using the "I was in war, I'm screwed up as a result, so you should make allowances for me" routine. I expect more of my fellow vets. I expect them to be head and shoulders above the riff-raff that did not serve, and set an example of what manhood (and yes, womanhood), can be.
 
Last edited:
I like the driving analogy and the poster of that suggests that both of those sayings are similar. Also, It seems that it would be unlikely that anyone would be attacked physically on this forum. Not sure how you would even do that. So, posting a "Drive defensively" signature or even, converting it to a more rocketry related subject, "Fly Defensively" would make more sense, cause less grief, be more positive, and not chase away the new and younger people that an earlier poster said we were trying to attract. If I read a signature like that on a forum my 10 or 12 year old son was reading I think I would have second thoughts about them taking advice from that person on pretty much any subject. I also agree with Al's post above.

I don't know if TR has left or not. I hope not. This may have not been handled to the liking of many of the members but it did need to be handled IMHO.
 
Did I see a post from the sodmister? It's good to have you back buddy!


Oh and, blaa blaa TRF bad blaa blaa stop what ever you are doing wrong blaa blaa.

Don't go anywhere Top we need ya man. Shake it off and get back talking about rockets.


TA
 
The very existence of this thread…

Points to a larger underlying issue…

We have become a nation of whiners…

So easily offended and even will go…

Out of our way to look for things…

To be offended about… (Battle Flag)

It is a direct result of the bubble-wrapped society…

You do not have a right to not be offended…

All of you hand wringers and whiners…

Need to STFU and leave Top alone…
 
"When I think of rockets, I touch mice elf"...

Is This An Acceptable Signature?
 
The very existence of this thread…

Points to a larger underlying issue…
We have become a nation of whiners…
So easily offended and even will go…
Out of our way to look for things…
To be offended about… (Battle Flag)
It is a direct result of the bubble-wrapped society…
You do not have a right to not be offended…
All of you hand wringers and whiners…
Need to STFU and leave Top alone…

Yes, true. Me? If I don't like what you write, I ignore it. I don't insist that the system filters the content to the point where my precious sensibilities are not disturbed. By the same token, if you do something that does not fit "da rulez" and get your hand slapped, stop whining about that. And the nonsense about "we don't have clearly defined rules" is a specious argument at best. I know when I grew up I often found out what the rules were when my dad whacked me upside the head. They weren't written down, and I did not read and agree to them.

Top Ramen is no better nor worse than any of us. He has to obey whatever random rules the rest of us have to adhere to. If he does not like that, then he can (as he has indicated he will) hit the road. Same for each and every one of us. Service to the our country is a privilege and not a ticket to poor social behavior. I take immense pride in my service (as does each and every other vet I know). I think it made me stronger, more adaptable, and able to deal with stress in a manner that those who have not served will never be able to match.
 
Last edited:
Here is the question that bugs me. Folks here are not stupid, yet they continue to do things like this "signature" that they know will push a button and generate controversy. Why do they do that? Yes, the line in question may have strong personal appeal to the person who originally applied it, however they had to know that not everyone served in the military or in a role where the context of that statement made sense. Somehow I don't think that if politeness does not work on the range, killing the person who is obstructing your enjoyment is on the option list. I begin to think folks do this simply to garner attention.



I wore a uniform for twelve years and to this day do not walk around thinking that I am at constant risk. I will admit my service was peacetime and maritime in nature so I don't have the mindset that comes with facing combat, however I just grow weary of fellow vets using the "I was in war, I'm screwed up as a result, so you should make allowances for me" routine. I expect more of my fellow vets. I expect them to be head and shoulders above the riff-raff that did not serve, and set an example of what manhood (and yes, womanhood), can be.

Al, it has nothing to do with going to war. In my 20+ years, I have seen many different versions s of the Composite Risk Management program. It is not specifically targeted toward combat operations, rather, it is meant to be applied in all circumstances. Not a year goes by that I don't end up sitting through 2 or more CRM classes. Now, my time is all Army time and other services may not have the same emphasis (but I kind of doubt that).

We'll said KidRocket. To piggyback on that, to be ofended requires two people and both have a choice. If I see something that I feel is inappropriate I have many choices, the one that I do not chose is to be offended as it accomplishes nothing. If I feel that it needs to be dealt with, it can be handled with little fanfare and not drug through a public forum.

If I am going to be alarmed by anything, I will be alarmed at all of the alarmists that raise the alarm at anything that they find even remotely alarming.
 
So BigRiJoe saw TR's signature, and got offended, and decided to tell on him.

TopRamen got offended by the signature being edited so he took his ball and went home, vowing to quit TRF for good. TR also recently admitted to quitting Netflix because they gave him a recommendation that wasn't accurate, so he's definitely got high standards for what he's willing to accept in a website.

I just see these guys as more examples of people getting offended WAY too easily anymore.
 
If I am going to be alarmed by anything, I will be alarmed at all of the alarmists that raise the alarm at anything that they find even remotely alarming.


This, I like -> It would make a signature that rocks.

I guess what irritates (not offends) me is the almost incessant need some people seem to feel to push the envelope of acceptability here. I understand your thought on composite risk management and did not mean to tie it to combat. I was more dismayed that more and more of my fellow vets use the fact that they have served as an excuse for sub-par social behavior. The question in my mind remains, why was that specific quote felt to be apropos in this environment? I would have never noticed it as I personally do not find much of what the individual who used the supposedly offending line writes to be interesting or applicable to sport rocketry as I enjoy it. As such I most likely would not have seen it. Had I noticed I think, at most, I would have thought - "geeze was that really necessary" and moved on.
 
Last edited:
If you don't offend someone
at least once a day then you are doing it all wrong.


TA
 
I always read the signature as something to get a rise out of people. You could take it to be mildly offensive if you really wanted to, or you could just ignore it. It would be far less likely to be offensive if the source of the quote was given, but I'm not the boss. To answer the OP's question, it might be an entirely appropriate signature in a MMORPG or a military forum. It would be entirely inappropriate on the Barney forum. Everywhere else, it's kinda gray in various shades.

When my daughter was starting to ride her bike on the street, I told her to assume that everyone on the road is trying to kill her, until they have proven otherwise by being 100 yards away and moving off. That approach has kept me from serious bike commuting accidents for several years. When you are the small fish, it's totally reasonable to assume everyone else is out to get you. I'm sure that's also appropriate behavior for cops. For people who spent time in the military, particularly those who did ground patrols in crowds, I can see that radar being hard to turn off.

All that said, there's no excuse for moderators editing the signature. If messages to the poster don't get results in changing the signature, then they have every right to ban him. They do not have the right to edit someone's words, particularly in their signature. Well, maybe they do under TRF guidelines, but they shouldn't.
 
Do you want to know how this whole business started? I had the following quote from a member as part of my "signature." "I think everyone knew what motors he was talking about. What's a "Soncis" igniter Fred? " I received a warning and had that removed line from from my signature. I guess that was more threatening that Ramen's,eh?
 
Back
Top