As you might have noticed, people are using their own words for support. I've seen one or two people use “no support” to mean support and vice versa. This is downright confusing for the topic owner and the practice should be banned.

Yeah, I put that as a joke about people using their own words, and how confusing it is (I'm not sure who had it first). I probably should change it - I've been completely avoiding using the phrase “No support” now in case that confused people as well.

For the record, anything I have said about supporting or not supporting ideas is exactly what I meant.

I think the whole thing with “Someword = Support” should be done away with, because remembering 20 or so support words is just irritating.

AonymousGuy wrote:

I think the whole thing with “Someword = Support” should be done away with, because remembering 20 or so support words is just irritating.

This I support. But that is a suggestion for another topic.

Well I use a different word only because like you said others use no support as support and also:

AonymousGuy wrote:

I think the whole thing with “Someword = Support” should be done away with, because remembering 20 or so support words is just irritating.

You could have the word like this:

RPFluffy's Sig wrote:

Kiwi = Support

Like my sig

Yeah, RPFluffy you created a monster.

Apoyo






sorry I can't help myself

OmnipotentPotato wrote:

Yeah, RPFluffy you created a monster.

Apoyo






sorry I can't help myself

Well it helps. I know I created the best thing on Scratch but I DIDN'T create the No Support = Support thing.
So if anyone starts blaming it on ME it wasn't my fault the No Support = Support

RPFluffy wrote:

OmnipotentPotato wrote:

Yeah, RPFluffy you created a monster.

Apoyo






sorry I can't help myself

Well it helps. I know I created the best thing on Scratch but I DIDN'T create the No Support = Support thing.
So if anyone starts blaming it on ME it wasn't my fault the No Support = Support

Good point.

The only actual person I've seen do this is SFG and I'm pretty active (his is just a joke though).

OmnipotentPotato wrote:

RPFluffy wrote:

OmnipotentPotato wrote:

Yeah, RPFluffy you created a monster.

Apoyo






sorry I can't help myself

Well it helps. I know I created the best thing on Scratch but I DIDN'T create the No Support = Support thing.
So if anyone starts blaming it on ME it wasn't my fault the No Support = Support

Good point.

The only actual person I've seen do this is SFG and I'm pretty active (his is just a joke though).

TimothyLawyer also has it.

TheHockeyist wrote:

As you might have noticed, people are using their own words for support.

I have noticed this.

TheHockeyist wrote:

I've seen one or two people use “no support” to mean support and vice versa. This is downright confusing for the topic owner and the practice should be banned.

In what topics has this occurred?

AonymousGuy wrote:

I think the whole thing with “Someword = Support” should be done away with, because remembering 20 or so support words is just irritating.

Also, people's sigs can change. So if the meaning of their comment is not actually contained in their comment, that creates a problem for the future.

TimothyLawyer wrote:

TheHockeyist wrote:

As you might have noticed, people are using their own words for support.

I have noticed this.

TheHockeyist wrote:

I've seen one or two people use “no support” to mean support and vice versa. This is downright confusing for the topic owner and the practice should be banned.

In what topics has this occurred?

AonymousGuy wrote:

I think the whole thing with “Someword = Support” should be done away with, because remembering 20 or so support words is just irritating.

Also, people's sigs can change. So if the meaning of their comment is not actually contained in their comment, that creates a problem for the future.

You make excellent arguments. I cannot argue with the first. The second is based more on users than topics. The third I cannot argue with. It creates problems in the future.

Support.

Cottage cheese to the discouraging of the ‘no support = support’ thing. But I think that using ‘cottage cheese’ (or other) as support is OK if the user clearly shows what they mean in their signature. I think going ahead and ‘banning’ it is a bit far fetched, but I think discouraging it would be the right thing. Like when a user posts in scratchblocks.

Absolute support. Pulling a joke by assigning “support” to a variable word warrants unnecessary messages and makes it difficult to discern “support” from “no support.”

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Absolute support. Pulling a joke by assigning “support” to a variable word warrants unnecessary messages and makes it difficult to discern “support” from “no support.”

But not unless clearly stated in a signature like most peoples…

cheeseeater wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Absolute support. Pulling a joke by assigning “support” to a variable word warrants unnecessary messages and makes it difficult to discern “support” from “no support.”

But not unless clearly stated in a signature like most peoples…

But as TimothyLawyer said:

TimothyLawyer wrote:

Also, people's sigs can change. So if the meaning of their comment is not actually contained in their comment, that creates a problem for the future.

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

cheeseeater wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Absolute support. Pulling a joke by assigning “support” to a variable word warrants unnecessary messages and makes it difficult to discern “support” from “no support.”

But not unless clearly stated in a signature like most peoples…

But as TimothyLawyer said:

TimothyLawyer wrote:

Also, people's sigs can change. So if the meaning of their comment is not actually contained in their comment, that creates a problem for the future.

Most people will keep that simple line of text there though. Anyways, its probably all a fad and will die out pretty quick.

cheeseeater wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

cheeseeater wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Absolute support. Pulling a joke by assigning “support” to a variable word warrants unnecessary messages and makes it difficult to discern “support” from “no support.”

But not unless clearly stated in a signature like most peoples…

But as TimothyLawyer said:

TimothyLawyer wrote:

Also, people's sigs can change. So if the meaning of their comment is not actually contained in their comment, that creates a problem for the future.

Most people will keep that simple line of text there though. Anyways, its probably all a fad and will die out pretty quick.

Yes. It's just a passing fashion. It can be annoying, but so long as it is obvious what they mean (e.g. by saying in signature) it's not too much of a problem.

I just got rid of mine, it was causing too much confusion.

GyroscopeBill wrote:

Yes. It's just a passing fashion. It can be annoying, but so long as it is obvious what they mean (e.g. by saying in signature) it's not too much of a problem.

As GyroscopeBill says, it will pass. No point complaining and making a fuss about something that will be gone in a couple of weeks.