Signature

[_JohnB330ci]

So, I was just wondering, how come we're not allowed images within our signatures? And have them limited to certain resolutions such as 1920x300, I think this would be cool cause it can allow for this like such:

[Katsunaka]

So people with limited data caps on their internet can browse and not waste their data on loading someone's sig over and over.

 

I'm not limited, but I'm aware there are people who do have limited internet.

[_JohnB330ci]

1 minute ago, Katsunaka said:

So people with limited data caps on their internet can browse and not waste their data on loading someone's sig over and over.

 

I'm not limited, but I'm aware there are people who do have limited internet.

Could be fixed with a button that stops the loading of images in signatures? Like the current button to not show other people's signatures? I can see what you mean though 

[minibois]

Because it could make for a mess. I sometimes go to other forums which do allow it and they often look like rubbish because everyone has weird picture signatures with all kinds of colors and stuff

 

EDIT: some of the text is not really easily readable on your picture too

[_JohnB330ci]

2 minutes ago, Minibois said:

Because it could make for a mess. I sometimes go to other forums which do allow it and they often look like rubbish because everyone has weird picture signatures with all kinds of colors and stuff

Surely that could be regulated though? Or have a verification system to ensure the staff want it on the forms, so nothing inappropriate is put on?

[Murasaki]

Why you say? Because of THIS.

11 minutes ago, SherifsDog22 said:

eyesore city

[_JohnB330ci]

2 minutes ago, ModuleLFS said:

Why you say? Because of THIS.

eyesore city

Why is it an eyesore? Its an opinion, everyone's is different, I could happily go around saying that people's current signatures are an "eyesore" because they use colours or fonts I don't like.

[Katsunaka]

2 minutes ago, SherifsDog22 said:

Could be fixed with a button that stops the loading of images in signatures? Like the current button to not show other people's signatures? I can see what you mean though 

Its' just easier making signatures text based.

 

Then people would have to look for that setting, then the admins would have to add the box to turn sigs off.

 

I'm fine with the current implemented version of sigs, I can't stand seeing all those gif based sigs, a color diarrhea, and everything else a picture based sig brings.

Plus just people would be dumb and have sigs that are full HD 4k pictures as sigs. 

[minibois]

7 minutes ago, SherifsDog22 said:

Surely that could be regulated though? Or have a verification system to ensure the staff want it on the forms, so nothing inappropriate is put on?

Well that would make for a whole lot of regulating and just keeping up. Right now the mods already seem busy, so making them go through all kinds of images for signature on top of it all would make it so it can take a long time before signatures are shown.

 

[_JohnB330ci]

20 minutes ago, Katsunaka said:

Its' just easier making signatures text based.

 

Then people would have to look for that setting, then the admins would have to add the box to turn sigs off.

 

I'm fine with the current implemented version of sigs, I can't stand seeing all those gif based sigs, a color diarrhea, and everything else a picture based sig brings.

Plus just people would be dumb and have sigs that are full HD 4k pictures as sigs. 

I guess that's understandable, and for the resolution, that's why I said something like a 1920x300 Resolution lock, so people specifically can only make banners, and not put on giant 4K Pictures

 

20 minutes ago, Minibois said:

Well that would make for a whole lot of regulating and just keeping up. Right now the mods already seem busy, so making them go through all kinds of images for signature on top of it all would make it so it can take a long time before signatures are shown.

 

This is true I guess, anyway, just wanted to know why

[Enderman]

its a signature

 

its not an advertisement spot

its not an arts display

its not a place for a bibliography

 

if you want to get fancy then do it on the "about me" page of your profile which is there just for that

[GreezyJeezy]

so i dont post real boobs in it

[vorticalbox]

47 minutes ago, Katsunaka said:

So people with limited data caps on their internet can browse and not waste their data on loading someone's sig over and over.

 

I'm not limited, but I'm aware there are people who do have limited internet.

just loading the main page is about 7MB. Vivaldi tells me so.

[LogicalDrm]

21 hours ago, SherifsDog22 said:

Surely that could be regulated though? Or have a verification system to ensure the staff want it on the forms, so nothing inappropriate is put on?

Staff verifying thousands of sigs per day? Or have fool proof automatic? Yeah, no. If you need to have pics like that, you have profile and status updates.

[TheSuspect]

22 hours ago, SherifsDog22 said:

So, I was just wondering, how come we're not allowed images within our signatures? And have them limited to certain resolutions such as 1920x300, I think this would be cool cause it can allow for this like such:

Because you get those people who abuse it.