"Peace again to you, your servant and a slave of Chris

[Danmark]

Admittedly, objecting to some salutations puts the objector in a position of appearing mean. OK. Mea Culpa.

However they seem phony to me and when they are used incessantly they function as a goad and appear insincere.

Are there limits to their use? As long as they seem syrupy sweet enough can use any salutation? Let me suggest some examples:

"May your mind always be clear and bright, allowing you to discriminate between truth and the lies your father taught you."
OK. Not a good example.

"May you see clearly to discriminate between your imagination and truth,
Lovingly,
Danny"
[strike]
"Peace to all, even you racist _ _ _ _ ...."[/strike]

No. Thats'a no good.

How about,
"I love you all deeply; may the scales of superstition fall from your beautiful eyes,
Prayerfully Yours in Molech,
Hector"

[ttruscott]

Hector

Who's Hector? And Chris for that matter?

[bluethread]

"May you see clearly to discriminate between your imagination and truth,
Lovingly,
Danny"

This is one I might even use. However, do as you please. In contexts where there is consent, salutations serve to reinforce that. That said, I personally do not respond to them, since they are generally begging assent.

[Danmark]

Hector

Who's Hector? And Chris for that matter?

"Chris?" I wrote "Chris?" Who is anyone?
These are just random examples using my other imaginary personae.
Edit:
OK, now I get it. The last word in the 'Subject' was "Christ," but the last letter and closing quotation mark were omitted by the DCR's word limitation program.
But then, you probably knew that and I am explaining the obvious and looking like a doofus. [sigh]

_ Peace again to you,
Your servant and a slave of Christ

Hector

[Danmark]

"May you see clearly to discriminate between your imagination and truth,
Lovingly,
Danny"

This is one I might even use. However, do as you please. In contexts where there is consent, salutations serve to reinforce that. That said, I personally do not respond to them, since they are generally begging assent.

How about:
"If I have done anything that appears to have broken a rule, or [Dog forbid] appear to have insulted anyone, please forgive me. It was not intentional even if I called you a . . . . which you probably richly deserved."

[Haven]

I think salutations / signoffs are cute, but I've always put mine in my signature to avoid just what Danmark is describing. They definitely can take up unnecessary space in a post, but really they don't bother me at all. They're just an extra few lines of text; skip them if you're not interested.

[Hamsaka]

I'm just like . . . live and let live, why not?

If someone wears an incredibly obnoxious hair bow on her shaved head, I might have to work hard to pay attention to her and NOT the bow . It's her way of . . . well, expressing whatever it is that she feels it is important to express. Big deal.

Yeah, there's limits to this, so no false dichotomies insinuated or necessary.

In fact, I'm impressed when a person who presents themselves in a way that may inspire negative reactions, and keeps on expressing themselves because it is that important to them, well I think that person has a rare amount of authenticity.

If however it's not about deeply felt conviction, but more about self-promotion, then that's disgusting behavior in anyone above the age of 9. I think most people know that, and would go to length to avoid giving that impression. What you end up with are the people who really don't get it (seriously no comprende) on one side of a bell curve, the average rabble in the bell, and then some folks most of us might not understand very well out there at the other edge of the curve. YMMV.