Signatures

[PrincessKiara]

I removed my adoptables and put the animation/link/credits stuff in my spoiler tag. That`s OK, right? The part of the sig that shows is well within the limits.

[Simbaholikov]

Waaaaat.. that's far too small.

[Simbadacub]

But, if people are distracted by sigs then shouldn't they just disable sig viewing in their profile?

[SnowyCheetah]

^ Yes.

Dude, that's way too small! If someone is distracted by sigs they can disable sigs. Or just make a rule not to have animated sigs. But OMFG sigs are something people love to play around with, experiment with and stuff. You just made about three quarters of the sigs on this site against the rules. :| The last sig requirement was reasonable, and I've seen a helluva lot of members breaking it. If sigs are distracting, enforce the rules you already have in place rather than making more restrictive ones. There are soooooooooo many things wrong with this. I mean look at my sig. It's not distracting not because of its size (though I keep it from getting big), but because it has no animations.

[Azdgari]

That's still really liberal compared to a lot of sites. And some sigs were getting really out of control. I have no problem with this. ^^

[Simbaholikov]

^
Some sigs were only getting out of control because they were way over the limits, and no one was telling them to reduce them.

[SnowyCheetah]

^ EXACTLY. When I was a mod I was at least trying to enforce the sig limits that were already in place (which had the same penalties for breaking them as the new ones do). After I left, sigs have been getting far over the limits and no one is doing anything except putting new, more restrictive ones in place.

As the sig limits were before, no sig was supposed to exceed the size of this picture:



Now our ENTIRE signature, including all elements, is supposed to fit into this!:



Obviously, people have been breaking the sig rules a lot. Why make new rules that are more restrictive when you could just start actually enforcing the ones already in place? And perhaps disallow animations as well. Those... are very distracting.

[FlipMode]

[quote="Azdgari"]That's still really liberal compared to a lot of sites. And some sigs were getting really out of control. I have no problem with this. ^^[/quote]

I agree with that. It is still more than most sites allow for, some do not even allow sigs at all!
As some what of a Graphic Designer I can say that it is still enough space to make one nice image and that is all you really need.
Not to mention, the new rotator. If you do want more than one image, just put them all on the new rotator (Which is actually a very awesome feature, thanks Moka!)

Also Snowy: IF we are going to disable animations, it would have to be in the sense that they are moderated, GIF (which is the file extension animations use) also allows for transparency in still images and is real useful for some effects. So yeah just saying that I would not want the whole extension to be disabled :] but I am not disagreeing with what you said about disabling animations.

Edit: Is that the limit for each image, or the entire signature combined?

[MalibuTrashDog]

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIMATED SIGS. :l

Snow I am disappoint.

[Simbaholikov]

[quote="FlipMode"]Edit: Is that the limit for each image, or the entire signature combined?[/quote]

The entire sig combined.