Large signatures

What's with the people who have multiple photos in their signature? They're running onto the next page. Please fix the issue.</p>

 

Already been a discussion on this and We are in talks about sig size limits</p>

 

I think the line that seperates the sig and the post should be thicker, and yeah, there should be a restriction on how big a sig can be.</p>

 

250 pixels tall?</p>

 

Yeah members who have like two signatures I find it very annoying and it doesn't even look nice.This is something that should be fixed.</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

This has been discussed and MikeDC already let it slip that there will be a system where posters are able to disable the sig per user... somewhere in the future, right now there is other stuff being worked on.</p>

-Petey</p>

</div></p>

I still think that's a horrible idea.</p>

Can somebody give me an example of a signature that impedes enjoyment of the board?</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shapecity)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

Why is it a horrible idea? It gives the user the option to view sigs or not. The more customization the better.</p>

</div></p>

I don't like it. People are identified by their avatars and signatures and it makes this feel like more of a community.</p>

Just my opinion.</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shapecity)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

Why is it a horrible idea? It gives the user the option to view sigs or not. The more customization the better.</p>

</div></p>

I don't like it. People are identified by their avatars and signatures and it makes this feel like more of a community.</p>

Just my opinion.</p>

</p>

</div></p>

Each person has their own tastes. By eventually allow the users to determine if they want to see such images we maintain our goal of being an inclusive community. It is a much more elegant solution than being signature police.</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hunter)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

I think the line that seperates the sig and the post should be thicker, and yeah, there should be a restriction on how big a sig can be.</p>

</div></p>

Question for you: Is it the amount of text or the size of images in signatures that you feel need to be restricted? Both?</p>

P.S. We appreciate the criticism. We are always looking for ways to better the site to cater to our members.</p>

</div></p>

I'd have to say it varies. Most of the time it is just the images. The text size doesnt bother me that much unless it is very big.</p>

</p>

As for images though, sometimes i feel a need to doubletake to see if the image is part of the post or the sig. This is mostly due to the black line that seperates the two isnt thick enough imo.</p>

</p>

 

I think being able to view or not view sigs is a good idea, just as long as we're talking about individual posters getting their own privacy settings. Otherwise, banning the use of sigs to some users and not others on a global level is kinda weak (but I don't think thats whats being talked about here)</p>

 

I like the idea of optional signatures and avatars being visible.</p>

I disagree with the statement "People are identified by their avatars and signatures and it makes this feel like more of a community."</p>

People are identified by the quality of their posts and their usernames. I never remember signatures or avatars. I recall the username and the contributions and quality of posts made on forums I frequent.</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Trench)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

I like the idea of optional signatures and avatars being visible.</p>

I disagree with the statement "People are identified by their avatars and signatures and it makes this feel like more of a community."</p>

People are identified by the quality of their posts and their usernames. I never remember signatures or avatars. I recall the username and the contributions and quality of posts made on forums I frequent.</p>

</div></p>

I bet you are a Niners fan.</p>

That's a cool signature. Where can I get one?</p>

I wonder how to try out for the graphics team.</p>

</p>

 

I agree that the black line needs to be thicker, or there needs to be space between the line and the signature.</p>

I haven't seen any signatures that are offensively and ridiculously long on this site. My problem is that on some threads they spill out of the box that contains the post and go into the next one, which makes it difficult to read. Its more of a programming issue than anything else.</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (agoo101284)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

I agree that the black line needs to be thicker, or there needs to be space between the line and the signature.</p>

I haven't seen any signatures that are offensively and ridiculously long on this site. My problem is that on some threads they spill out of the box that contains the post and go into the next one, which makes it difficult to read. Its more of a programming issue than anything else.</p>

</div></p>

What browser are you using? Do you have any screen shots? I ask because I have never seen that.</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Trench)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

I like the idea of optional signatures and avatars being visible.</p>

I disagree with the statement "People are identified by their avatars and signatures and it makes this feel like more of a community."</p>

People are identified by the quality of their posts and their usernames. I never remember signatures or avatars. I recall the username and the contributions and quality of posts made on forums I frequent.</p>

</div></p>

That is great that both of you have a different way of remembering who people are. Neither of you is correct and neither of you is wrong.</p>

The goal is to add features that allows the users to customize their experience at the site because everyone is different.</p>

</p>