No Images in Signatures

[bananaoil]

Egads! Seizure inducing!!!!!

...occasionally seizure inducing images...

Also, you have the disadvantage of not knowing the often sarcastic nature of my posts. But, to be fair, anyone who's a member of multiple message boards will encounter animated signatures that are flashy and distract.

And its HUUUGE too!

It's certainly larger than an avatar, which can be found on the side of a message as opposed to the bottom, preventing it from expanding the height of a message, thus allowing more messages to appear on the same page.

Wait a sec there- there's message board vanity now? Don't make me laugh.

Just because you dislike image sigs doesn't mean all of us are trying to satisfy said 'glorified vanity plates' The last quoted bit was one of the most ignoran things I have ever heard. People just want to make their posts look more interesting, and overal make the post look better. Just because people don't chare yur opinion doesn't make them 'vain'. Seriosuly, sigs are so dam easy to ignore, and you are kidding me if you think any sig so far is 'seizure-inducing'

.

Here's the first definition of "vanity" found on Dictionary.com:

excessive pride in one's appearance, qualities, abilities, achievements, etc.; character or quality of being vain; conceit: Failure to be elected was a great blow to his vanity.

[Primevalgodzilla V2]

Also, you have the disadvantage of not knowing the often sarcastic nature of my posts. But, to be fair, anyone who's a member of multiple message boards will encounter animated signatures that are flashy and distract.

If you read the thread, you would realise everyone agreed to amke do without animated sigs.

It's certainly larger than an avatar, which can be found on the side of a message as opposed to the bottom, preventing it from expanding the height of a message, thus allowing more messages to appear on the same page.

Firstly, there is a size limit to sigs which makes sure they don't interfere with reading. Secondly, most sigs are only 300 by 700 max, which doesn't really matter. Third, no matter how big the sigs are, the number of posts per page is always 15.

Here's the first definition of "vanity" found on Dictionary.com:

So i want to say, make my website/poster/book more pleasing to the eye, I'm automatically vain now right?

[Legion1979]

Image sigs don't make posts look better. I also laugh when I see a post text that's maybe a line or so long and then larger image sig take up a majority of the post space. It's unnecessary and all the best forums I've ever been a member of have gotten rid of these silly things. You want to individualize your posts? Do it with the avatar and what you write. I'm just really loving how clean everything looks now.

[bananaoil]

If you read the thread, you would realise everyone agreed to amke do without animated sigs.

If that's the case, then why are members, including yourself, still debating the issue on page 4, which is the previous page of this tread?

Firstly, there is a size limit to sigs which makes sure they don't interfere with reading.

The limit has nothing to do with reading. It's a bandwidth issue.

Third, no matter how big the sigs are, the number of posts per page is always 15.

Now, that was something of which I was unaware. I humbly retract that portion of my statement.

So i want to say, make my website/poster/book more pleasing to the eye, I'm automatically vain now right?

A signature in the context of this discussion refers to a field at the end of a user's post which contains text, an image, or both. The word "website" is a broad term that could include any number of things, and I would never read a book in which every page ended with a large, most likely poorly photoshopped image and some smarmy text.

Regardless, the term "vain" simply implies a person's desire to promote their image. Most people are vain because most people have egos. It's not an insult unless their vanity gets in the way of their interaction with others.

[vaporchu]

You know, I'm thinking it might be possible for Arbok to make an option to turn off sigs. I'm not sure what the limitations of this forum are, but I know at one forum I go to it's entirely possible to disable sigs. But they run on a different software(vbulletin there as opposed to phpBB here), so I guess its probably not possible here. Just some food for thought though.

[G1 Startruck Jonez]

I'm fine with no image sigs. But the avatars should really be moved to the left. Since your eyes move from left to right, having an avatar and screen name on the left hand side (like most forums) tells you immediately who is posting. I do see the screen names written on the left, but the avatars should be there too.

You can do that, actually. Go to Board Preferences in User Control Panel and then scroll down to My Board Style. Change that to Gotengo (Purple) and that'll push the avatars to the left.

Ahh, thank you kind Arrow! Now I feel a little bit "more at home".

[bananaoil]

You know, I'm thinking it might be possible for Arbok to make an option to turn off sigs. I'm not sure what the limitations of this forum are, but I know at one forum I go to it's entirely possible to disable sigs. But they run on a different software(vbulletin there as opposed to phpBB here), so I guess its probably not possible here. Just some food for thought though.

A very good idea. If this forum can swing that, then the only question is whether or not the inclusion of signatures eat up significant bandwidth.

[Primevalgodzilla V2]

If that's the case, then why are members, including yourself, still debating the issue on page 4, which is the previous page of this tread?

All of us are okay (if a little unhappy) with no animated sigs rule, but most of us want image sigs.

The limit has nothing to do with reading. It's a bandwidth issue.

It appears Arbok and Vega have little problems with bandwdth and more so with loading time/forum 'cleanness'. So I am led to believe that the bandwdth thing is not a real issue, especially since most sigs aen't all that big (in kb) once compressed

Regardless, the term "vain" simply implies a person's desire to promote their image. Most people are vain because most people have egos. It's not an insult unless their vanity gets in the way of their interaction with others.

I don't think any of us don sigs to receive ego strokes. Its just cool. Especially sicne said sigs are generally made by someone else anyway (usually in the form of Mitchal, 3000 and Goji_Girl)

[Hedorah]

Ya know what I'm just gonna post my old image sig in every post I think

[SuperSaiyan4Godzilla]

Image sigs don't make posts look better. I also laugh when I see a post text that's maybe a line or so long and then larger image sig take up a majority of the post space. It's unnecessary and all the best forums I've ever been a member of have gotten rid of these silly things. You want to individualize your posts? Do it with the avatar and what you write. I'm just really loving how clean everything looks now.

In the words that the previously banned members have said...


This isn't the other forums. This. Is. TK.

[vaporchu]

In the words that the previously banned members have said...


This isn't the other forums. This. Is. TK.

No, this is Patrick!

I'm fine either way, really. I guess I'll miss showcasing my sprites in my sig, but on several forums I have just a text signature anyways.

[Arrow]

After having gotten a couple days to check out the site and how it looks without the constant display of pictures. I gotta say... I like it. The picture sigs - while cool - are often distracting. They serve no purpose but to show off. While it wouldn't kill me if they were allowed back, I actually prefer this.

That said, It would be neat if this forum would be able to have a 'turn off image sigs' option, since so many others simply must have some meaningless picture at the bottom of each of their posts...

[yaburu]

In the words that the previously banned members have said...


This isn't the other forums. This. Is. TK.

No, this is Patrick!

No, THIS. IS. SPARTAAAAAA!!

I don't care how old it is. I still like it. Anyways, yeah, I like the look of this forum without everyone and their momma having their own banner as a sig. More streamlined. And anything that prevents MM from having his "giant larva getting eaten alive" sig can only be a good thing.

[KaneLocke]

Do it with the avatar and what you write. I'm just really loving how clean everything looks now.

You say clean, I say bland, boring, and dull.

The sigs and color and give you a better idea about the poster than just an avatar and "What they post." People can bullshit there way through a paragraph of text. Artistic expression is something else entirely.

[SuperSaiyan4Godzilla]

Do it with the avatar and what you write. I'm just really loving how clean everything looks now.

You say clean, I say bland, boring, and dull.

The sigs and color and give you a better idea about the poster than just an avatar and "What they post." People can bullshit there way through a paragraph of text. Artistic expression is something else entirely.

I'll have to be honest...

Artistic expression can come through writing. And sigs are the artistic expressions of the sig maker, not the sig owner. Sig are used to express the sig owner's interests.

THat's why I like sigs. I can express my interests more than I can with words or an avatar.

[TokyoVigilante]

Animated ones are a pain. I'm in agreement with banning those. But lots of people use signatures and banners to advertise their websites, art, and stories and whatnot, so removing them I think is unfair.

Another thing I think should be banned is multiple images in signatures. Who needs two or 3 images, honestly?

[wataru]

Only images Id condone are Dragon Cave and Magistream eggs. No Dragonadopters, no animated user bars, no GIANT custom sigs.

[yaburu]

Only images Id condone are Dragon Cave and Magistream eggs. No Dragonadopters, no animated user bars, no GIANT custom sigs.

Doesn't Dragon Cave and things like that allow you to just copy and paste a link to your eggs? It's been a long time since I played that thing, so I'm not sure.

[wataru]

Only images Id condone are Dragon Cave and Magistream eggs. No Dragonadopters, no animated user bars, no GIANT custom sigs.

Doesn't Dragon Cave and things like that allow you to just copy and paste a link to your eggs? It's been a long time since I played that thing, so I'm not sure.

It has a link but it doesnt count as a view.

[Arbok]

You know, I'm thinking it might be possible for Arbok to make an option to turn off sigs. I'm not sure what the limitations of this forum are, but I know at one forum I go to it's entirely possible to disable sigs. But they run on a different software(vbulletin there as opposed to phpBB here), so I guess its probably not possible here. Just some food for thought though.

Sadly, the forums do not have something like that built in for us to enable. It would have to be hard-coded.