Not really -- signatures are already turned off in WO, for the very reason why I think merits should be turned off there: they are conducive to spamming.
Not exactly, it will depend on how the merits were created in the software. Signatures have been configured to be enabled or disabled.
I don't care about its merits, I don't know of any place on the forum where it is disabled. In other words, they may not have been developed with this function, which could involve redesigning everything.
Personally I like the
idea floated by PowerGlove about the option to turn merits off in a topic by its creator. Seems like a straight-forward implementation and would assist those who want discussion in their thread to be more serious.
The idea is not bad, the user can activate or deactivate it. But I repeat, I don't know to what extent, at a programming level, I would require rewriting this part. Impossible, isn't it! Necessary? I don't think so.
Now, the idea that I criticize is this: "more serious discussions, if there are no merits".
The idea of merit is to promote quality. Therefore, it should be the opposite, merits bring greater quality.
If this doesn't happen, it's not the merits' fault, but rather those who have a low quality criterion. But, as the forum has no rules for assigning merits, everyone gives the merits to whoever they want. I may not agree with that attribution of merits, but they weren't mine, each one gives to whoever he wants.
The point is that merit hunters don't need the WO topic for that. They can create topics themselves, and give merit to alts.
Saying that the sources of merits are not giving merits to those who deserve it in this topic is the same as saying that they do not have a good criteria for giving merits throughout the forum. And honestly I don't believe it!