Most, I think, will not be too bothered, but it suggests a general approach which misunderstands what is going on. As Atti says, it can get out of hand and become a contempt.
In civil proceedings two parties, unable to resolve their differences between themselves, find a third party they both respect who can be asked to hear everything and make an honest informed judgment which will be accepted by, binding on, the parties. It is an act of submission, The title merely reflects that submission by a party to the court, and a refusal to use the appropriate title shows a lack of the necessary respect. It appears childish and petty. Many cases involve an assessment of the honesty and reasonableness of the parties giving evidence. In making that assessment, a court uses the best evidence given to it. This will include the way the parties represent themselves.
A party accused of violence but denying it, cannot safely expect to have his denial believed if he accompanies it in court with a bashing of the usher.