Of course. Whoever said this would be done without review? Jeff, Riley, myself, and a couple others discussed the principle that a shop sign should be succinct. It can convey what's in the longer version though, just in form that's quicker to digest.

We can print out a sign that's concise without modifying the official shop rules document.

We'll even put "abridged" on the sign.

I'm working on the sign, adding graphic elements. Stay tuned...

awesome!

OK, here's my poster-sized version.

I spent most of the day working on this, except for an afternoon nap and dinner. It's much tougher than one might imagine to find similar looking images. The page in OpenOffice is 24" wide and 70" tall. I have kept the current rule items intact as far as message, but with less words. Note that we have only one or two bullet items under 3, 4, and 5, so bulleted lines were set further to the right to save vertical space. If we don't mind using up extra space, I could put those lines full left as well, or items under 1 and 2 lined up further right with 3,4, and 5..

I would sometime like to participate in another visit of the full rules as well, but for now I'm hitting the sack. Comments welcome.

So I cannot break the law of gravity?

Looks great guys!

I guess not, it's what is written in the rules. Unfortunately you can't break the law of entropy either. The long arm of mother nature will catch up with you later.

Wayne, this is magically delicious.

You've put in a lot of time and effort, and this looks way better than what I was expecting, or would have been able to do myself.

Thanks for going the extra mile on this, it makes a difference.

Riley

Riley, thanks for the kind comments. The staggered pointers bothered me, so I did some table formatting and got things lined up. I had to make it 72" tall, but I think this looks much nicer.

When it comes to signage, I'm in the K.I.S.S. camp--a sign needs to be short and concise or it will be ignored.

Wayne's sign good overall, though I'd like to see it even simpler.

Assuming this is the level of detail we seek, I have a few suggestions:

2.4 is, at the very least, grammatically complex. (I didn't diagram the word-putting-togetherness, sentence-wise to test validity ). Can we say this better? (I'll have a go myself later.)

5 and 5.1 are somewhat in conflict(?--struggling for the right word). Though both about labeling, they don't flow together as nicely as I'd like. May I suggest that the "rule", 5, become:

5. LABEL YOUR STUFF

With the following "sub" statements:

--Don't presume that unlabeled materials are "up for grabs".

--Unlabeled stuff is subject to disposal at the whim of the management and/or cleaning crews

--A label don't "make it right", but if your labeled stuff presents a problem we will attempt to contact you before taking drastic action.

Finally, I'd recap with something to the order of:

Rules can never cover every situation and will always be subject to interpretation. Please use common sense and remember our prime directive:

BE EXCELLENT




---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=44.934296,-93.466632