I can see it just fine, are you sure you're not looking at your sig and any moment a cat is going to steal it?

:oops:

How about this one?

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/tok...re_johnson.gif

Much better :yeah:

My usual handwriting happens to be so utterly incomprehensible that attempting to decipher it can drive the minds of mere mortals to madness. Or perhaps that was just me, I am not sure. In any case, I think handwriting is highly overrated.

Works for me, curiously enough. About a quarter of the times Oberon posts pictures they fail to show up on my end without digging up their URLs and manually looking at them.

Well, tell me you daft sod so I can throw it at imageshack and get around the MOSSAD filter! :O: Although sometimes I post from work which uses... *shudder* Internet Explorer, which fails on so many levels that it doesn't even like to 'copy image location'. :nope:

Fine, next time you post an image I cannot see, I shall immediately demand you upload it to a host from which I can see it or else. Better?

Indeed, although I reserve the right to completely ignore you. :yep:

Can see that one just fine. :sunny:

Timothy Geithner changed his signature so it would be legible on currency:

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/ec...-not-fit-print

I just print a large 'X'

I have been typing too long to change back now :D

Cheers

Gary

Interesting. i often judge people by their signature. The one in the OP looks like its from a guy who has done the same thing for decades, and is boring, desilusioned, confused and unable to innovate. (running round in circles, over and over again...)

In my capacity as Precinct Chief, I have to sign my name about 50 times in one day. It is interesting how the signatures change. Especially as the stress increases.

But then anyone who has closed on a house knows exactly how it is.

Or been in the military. :yep:

Why are we just now getting around to eliminating excess conference spending? :arrgh!:

The year is 2013. Handwritten signatures are 1400's technology. Only digital signatures have importance today.

They have an importance, but they are also extremely vulnerable to misuse and theft. I really only trust to great extent the handwritten signature on paper...

<O>

Exactly. Digital signatures are just begging to be misused.

It seems you guys all have missed my only point.

When somebody "signs" something by making three crosses, "X X X", then the question must be asked whether he can read or not. And when he can not, then it could happen that somebody puts just any paper on his desk, says "this is what we said yesterday, law X or treaty Y or rule Z, please sign it and then it becomes legally valid." But since the guy signing it cannot read it, he maybe makes something very different a law, a treaty valid, a rule. In other words: he has no control.

The spiral cable that this man is painting, has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with any signs of writing letters. Like making three crosses. As long as this man has not presented something readable in his writing, and has not demonstrated his ability to read a given text off the paper, I will assume he is an illiterate. When somebody signs something by making three crosses, or now a spiral cable, then I only assume that until the opposite is proven. He would not have been the first impostor climbing on the career ladder, or the first illiterate hiding his handicap successfully by delegating everything that could have given his secret away.

And do not get me started on what a graphologist would say about this "signature".

So I ask again: has it ever been demonstrated that this man actually can read and write?

LOL!
Imagine you have to test each and every Politician for that...

how many will fail? 5%?:hmmm::rotfl2:

No, we got it. It's probably just a combination of some people think it is just silly while others don't care altogether.

Okay.

Sounds good. I'm sure you'll let us know in painful detail how that works out for you.

What would a graphologist say about this "signature"? Inquiring minds want to know.

Probably.