My points stands regardless of an article. You do not need cursive for a signature, normal long hand isn't easier to imitate than cursive if that's what people are worried about.
I cannot think of any reason we need to write it.
There are 1,000 more important things we should be making children learn.
When you fill out papers and it says to print your name on one line and then asks for a signature on a second line...what is the distinction if there is no difference between the two?
Ffs guys, cursive is the last thing we should be worried about. Children cannot even name who won the Civil War or who even fought in the Civil War.
This is insanely retarded, you don't need cursive for a signature, who the fuck told anyone that?
A good article to educate yourself...BTW...did you bother to watch the video to see what was said about a signature?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-athletes-way/202010/why-cursive-handwriting-is-good-your-brain
My points stands regardless of an article. You do not need cursive for a signature, normal long hand isn't easier to imitate than cursive if that's what people are worried about.
I cannot think of any reason we need to write it.
There are 1,000 more important things we should be making children learn.
When you fill out papers and it says to print your name on one line and then asks for a signature on a second line...what is the distinction if there is no difference between the two?
There doesn't have to be...do you not know how signatures work or something?