trials_pimp Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Im all for picture signatures, as you can really be creative, and show others what interests you. I can see that not having them helps 56k people, but we could just have a setting to turn them off in contorls, so if you cant/dont want to see them you dont. Obvioulsy there should be limits, so we dont get full wall coverings on all posts. Something like 200 x 400 as an example. Please air your veiws Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_urban Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Im all for picture signatures, as you can really be creative, and show others what interests you. I can see that not having them helps 56k people, but we could just have a setting to turn them off in contorls, so if you cant/dont want to see them you dont. Obvioulsy there should be limits, so we dont get full wall coverings on all posts. Something like 200 x 400 as an example. Please air your veiws ← sure if that was true it would be done on here its slow as it is putting more stuff on would kill this site (Y) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Clark Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 No, they are annoying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Nichols Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 (edited) No. They are such a big problem for people with dial-up that it makes loading up a page a pain in the arse! I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to switch them off either.. without a bit of code or summit - and who really wants to do all that? Also, why bother really? You have a display pic, gallery and personal pic... surely this is enough? I find signatures annoying at the best of times anyway and I'm sure other people do too! Especially ones with lots of lines and lots of colour... Personally I'm all for the restricting of signatures to three lines only... Edited April 18, 2005 by nichols_sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonMack Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 (edited) I think if its possible to implement a system in which you can choose to have them turned on or off then they should be allowed, but only 500x100 max width/height. EDIT: Sam, you can turn sigs off in your preferences (Y) . Edited April 18, 2005 by MonsterJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Hardman Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 No. They are such a big problem for people with dial-up that it makes loading up a page a pain in the arse! I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to switch them off either.. without a bit of code or summit - and who really wants to do all that? Also, why bother really? You have a display pic, gallery and personal pic... surely this is enough? I find signatures annoying at the best of times anyway and I'm sure other people do too! Especially ones with lots of lines and lots of colour... Personally I'm all for the restricting of signatures to three lines only... ← sigs can be turned on or off, its not difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smo™ Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 I'm all for it, most of you know I love making them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCircus Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Well, i'm sure we could all turn them off, but I quite like to see all the cool little pictures underneath your names. However, seeing the same picture trillions of times in a thread would anger me to the point of homicide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philharg Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 some message boards just look absolutely terrible with signature pics big no no for me be creative in your posts (Y) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicH_87 Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 how about no. if you want to see pretty little pictures search google or find a different forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trialsking 55 Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 i'd want them. just a small one like. maybe there should be a week long trial where they should be allowed or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 i'd want them. just a small one like. maybe there should be a week long trial where they should be allowed or something? ← Yeh, but people MUST keep it to a certain size Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 One word: Avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonMack Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 I suppose people mainly want sig images to show individuality on a larger scale than avatars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
br3n Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 it tends to be noobie forums, like car modders etc where they go for full on photo sized pics in their sigs which agreed, looks retarded. If done tastefully they can look very nice, Heres a sample from were-over-there.net see what i mean? Im for sigs! Just small ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 it tends to be noobie forums, like car modders etc where they go for full on photo sized pics in their sigs which agreed, looks retarded. If done tastefully they can look very nice, Heres a sample from were-over-there.net see what i mean? Im for sigs! Just small ones. ← I just don't really see what that adds to the posts or anything though :lol: I mean the one of the guy flippin' the bird's just not really saying anything, is it? It's just a picture for the sake of a picture... Meh, probably just don't get it (Y)\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonMack Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Or just allow HTML in sigs so we could just do a simple styled div, I'd be more than happy with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Limbo (Trials Chimp) Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Don't really see the need for them myself. As i'm on 56k i'd have to turn sig's off if pic's were allowed. I don't really see how one extra picture is going to be all that good though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondy Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 No wouldnt really want them on the forum... I like making sigs...but they are quite annoying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onza-Ash Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 hmmm, bit pointless....i feel an avatar is enough, plus it keeps the forum 56k friendly...which is always good. Ash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.Wood Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 I'm gonna say no. All the reasons have been listed on the other page, i've never felt the need to be more creative. The only way i can see them being good is for only Mods/Admins/SM's being able to have them, then the numbers are limited and people who desperately want to have a small picture try harder in their posts and become a SM? So like a reward system. I'm probably talking bollocks, i'm tired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT! Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 I'v have a pic in my sig for ages, still do. :huh: I think sigs are a waste of time, they don't achive anything realy. And if pics are aloud, i will definatly be turning them off, as it'll just look a compleat mess. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_seamons Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 I'm gonna say no. All the reasons have been listed on the other page, i've never felt the need to be more creative. The only way i can see them being good is for only Mods/Admins/SM's being able to have them, then the numbers are limited and people who desperately want to have a small picture try harder in their posts and become a SM? So like a reward system. I'm probably talking bollocks, i'm tired. ← But that would just add fuel to the fire that senior member's are too elitist. I think a lot of people have this feeling already, and giving only them the option for images is a bit harsh. I agree with most people that images in sigs shouldn't be allowed. It just takes up too much space on the screen, and is extreemly distracting. However, having slightly larger avatars could be considered? Not too big mind, but just large enough so you can see a bit more detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 I suppose people mainly want sig images to show individuality on a larger scale than avatars. ← So you basically want to impose your personality more on us all? Let's face it, 99% of sigs will be rubbish, and even the 1% that look good, only look good the first time you see them, after that they're annoying. So it's a definite "No" from me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonno Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 No picture sig's are annoying, plus they take up so much more room, they are just a pain in the ass if you ask me...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.