We'd all like to know who this person was who downvoted a simple question.
I do not completely disagree with you, but for point of fact, that particular node has to date been down-voted 17 times and up-voted 21. Of course, which order those came in and whether before or after the addition of the explanation would tell more of the story.
Unfortunately, there are still occasions when simply asking a question is seen by some as reason enough to down-vote. It still bothers me when this happens, and not for the "loss of XP". Seems to me the only thing more stupid than *not* asking the question that forms in your mind--is to be offended (?) by it being asked.
On the sigs issue, as far as I am aware, all those that do not wish to sigs (except of course Anonymonks), have the ability to turn them off.
For my own feelings, the issue says more about those that find other peoples sigs such a source of irritation, along with those that find time to complain about spelling, grammar, incorrect abbreviations, acronyms & casing, than it does about those whom they are complaining about or to.
Imagine if every member whose native alphabet is non-ascii got upset because they are unable to correctly represent their names here. Or those from cultures where the family name prefixes the individual names got upset with the misuse of those names. Or I got on my high-horse about color -v- colour, zeros -v- zeroes, humor -v- humour, -ize & ized -v- -ise and -ised, etc. etc.
Language is about conveying ideas, not stagnating over a set of arbitrary rules invented by a bunch of 19th century academics with nothing better to do. I was taught that it was "so-and-so and I", not "so-and-so and me", but modern application has it that the latter makes more sense than the former, sufficiently that it is now the adopted practice of the BBC. It *still* sounds weird to my ears, but it does make more sense.
Equally, I was recently (nicely and probably correctly), corrected over my use of "him/her/them", in favour of "he/she/they", but if you review the sentence and substitute any of the latter onto it without the choices, my versions make better sounding sentences than the alternatives--to my ears at least.
English, and many other languages are like that. A set of ostensibly arbitrary rules and conventions devoid of any logic. You just have to live with it.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
