Signature Size

by **J@3** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:03 pm

Whatever mine is.. that's what it should be. And no, I'm not being bias nor self centered at all.

by **Stevan** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:55 pm

lol you funny fuckers. Seriously we don't need any pictures in signatures to be honest. I mean how important is it really? It's all wank factor I'm sorry to say. Remember the old forum. Signatures are like those wankers that drive cars with graphics all over them. Pointless. So there you go, anybody who's offended can write it in their signature... :lol:

by **Jackal** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:06 pm

I still think 450 by 100 is just dandy.

Holy shit, I just used the word dandy.

by **Stevan** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:22 pm

I still think 450 by 100 is just dandy.

Bloody Laker fans. How many different signatures with the Lakers in them do we really need to see? That just proves my point about wank factor! :lol:

by **Jackal** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:59 pm

Pfft, it's been awhile since I've had a lakers sig. Stop whining.

by **Bill Russell** on Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:01 pm

Agreed. There are some huge-ass sigs around, including yours, Nick and Jae.

I think 400x80 would fit the mood. (Y)

by **J@3** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 12:17 am

Tales wrote:Agreed. There are some huge-ass sigs around, including yours, Nick and Jae.

I think 400x80 would fit the mood.

Example #3,342 of why you should read an entire thread before posting :wink:

by **Andreas Dahl** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:04 am

I like Stevan's idea the most so far. (y)

No need for any sig's at all realy, even though quite contrary to what he does, I don't use them as wanking material, and I still like to get rid of them...

by **Jackal** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:22 am

The discussion of having no signature has been discussed more than enough times. There are people that like signatures & there are people that don't like signatures.

Removing signatures would satisfy only one group of people, the ones that don't like signatures. The people that do like signatures get all sad then.

Humm, how how how do we solve both problems? Humm, toughie eh? How's about what Alexboom said? Install the "Turn Off Signatures" in profile mod. OMG, wowie, what a brilliant idea Jackal, how ever did you come up with it. *Heh heh, those bastards have no idea I just stole it from Alexboom* Ehm, yeah. Just install the mod & voila, everyone gets their wish. Andreas & Stoivan will all be giddy & giggley with the option to not see signatures & guys such as myself can frolic around like the dickheads that we are that we do have the ability to post useless, seemingly purty graphics in our signature.

Two flies in one swat. Two birds with one rock. Hmm, comes down to hitting something. Are we violent or what?

Oh, btw, if this is aproved it'll probably come after the forum has moved to the new server. So yes, wait bitches.

by **alexboom** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:14 am

With the Turn Off Signatures mod I would be OK for 1600 x 1200 sigs

by **J@3** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:25 am

Well now that's settled, let's all get drunk and play ping pong :cool:

by **Colin** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:25 pm

Jae™ wrote:Well now that's settled, let's all get drunk and play ping pong

I'm in.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Wed Nov 17, 2004 3:54 pm

Jackal wrote:Oh, btw, if this is aproved it'll probably come after the forum has moved to the new server. So yes, wait bitches.

I think reducing the signature limit is a good idea, as well as installing that mod; I'm in favour of doing both. But yeah, the mod will have to wait until the forum is on the new server (the same circumstances prevent me from installing the mod or moving the forum at this very moment).

by **Donatello** on Mon Nov 22, 2004 11:08 am

man...it's really starting to drive me nuts, because "the future" is a really nice guy and he comments on my dynasty all the time, but his sig is like 8 feet by 12 feet.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Mon Nov 22, 2004 8:45 pm

I've had a look back at all the suggestions and considered each. For a new limit, how does 450x100 sound?

by **J@3** on Mon Nov 22, 2004 8:51 pm

PM him or something.

by **Ataraxia** on Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:37 pm

donatello pm'd abt it ..... well ill keep a limit on my signatures but can anybody solve my avatar crisis :cry:

by **truSt** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:01 am

450x100 is very small... well if you can add some text also it's possible though..

What about my sig :?:

by **Donatello** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:47 am

I like the 450x100. There's no need to have an art gallery in your sig.

Just for reference:

by . on Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:51 am

Im telling you this, making new signature size restrictions wont stop people from using larger ones and moderators will not even care about it. Ive seen this happen many times on the NLSC so why would it be different this time?

by **Donatello** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:13 am

obviously moderators will care about it since several have posted on this thread that they agree

by **Ruff Ryder** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:22 am

maybe 450 by 150, and instead of pm'ing members with sigs that are too big, just give them a sig like this:

Except saying "The signature limit is blah blah blah" or whatever. Then they'll not just think their sig link went dead or something.

by **Donatello** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:34 am

ruffryder8 wrote:maybe 450 by 150, and instead of pm'ing members with sigs that are too big, just give them a sig like this:

Except saying "The signature limit is blah blah blah" or whatever. Then they'll not just think their sig link went dead or something.

I would be more than willing to be the 'signature moderator', if need be :wink:

by **Cameron** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:31 am

I also tire of large sigs, take so long to load. I think mine's ok tho, maybe a bit big compared to the new rules. I would definitely moderate the banner sizes if I saw them big...

Big sigs are gay.

MONTROSS!!!

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:44 pm

K0be4mvp wrote:Im telling you this, making new signature size restrictions wont stop people from using larger ones and moderators will not even care about it. Ive seen this happen many times on the NLSC so why would it be different this time?

I assure you that we do care, I mostly PM people about their sigs though. Sometimes I'll post the request in the thread if a lot of people have commented on it, to illustrate that it really does bother people and isn't just being restrictive for the sake of being restrictive.

In the interest of fairness, we allow people to change their sigs themselves and give them a couple of days to do that; we've also allowed a little latitude. I guess we'll have to get a little tougher with that and simply remove sigs. I like Ruffryder's idea of replacing their signature with a generic "Your signature has been removed - this is the maximum allowed size" image.

OK, what is your opinion on...

...Ruffryder's suggestion? (Yes/No)
...450x150?
...450x100?

Tell me your preference or suggest another size and we'll make those amendments official.

Signature Size

Who is online