Signatures

[SnowyCheetah]

Not disable, disallow. It would be a lot more effective at eliminating distractions than putting this oppressive new rule into practice, and a lot easier to moderate. If all you want is one pic, then you won't really care, but those of us who see sigs as something more than just a place to put one pic, and use it as a place also to post links to some of our fanfictions and such (which is something that helps bring more activity to the site, HELLO!) suddenly have to either stop doing that, or put freaking tiny pictures in to make up for the lost space. The size of sigs is not a distraction as it was, it was perfectly fine. The problem was animations, and people who just disregard the limits (while I'm at it, might I point out that our moderators have not been enforcing these rules, otherwise we wouldn't have this problem).

[FlipMode]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"] If all you want is one pic, then you won't really care, but those of us who see sigs as something more than just a place to put one pic, and use it as a place also to post links to some of our fanfictions and such (which is something that helps bring more activity to the site, HELLO!) suddenly have to either stop doing that, or put freaking tiny pictures in to make up for the lost space.[/quote]

Or you could put the sig on a rotator, which Moka has kindly provided. That way it still displays everything, just not all at the same time. I am not arguing with you by saying this by the way dude, I am just trying to suggest a way to compromise. :)

@ Simbaholic, thanks for clearing that up! ^^

[SnowyCheetah]

Good idea! And we totally don't have to resize nearly ALL of our sigs- oh wait...

[WildSimba]

[quote="SillydogTheGreat"]THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ANIMATED SIGS. :l

Snow I am disappoint.[/quote]

[Moka]

PK: Yours is fine :]

[quote="Simbaholic"]Waaaaat.. that's far too small. [/quote]

Actually, if you shrunk your main image just 30 pixels and moved Simba down by your mood buttons, your signature will fit just fine :3

[quote="Simbadacub"]But, if people are distracted by sigs then shouldn't they just disable sig viewing in their profile?[/quote]

I don't think it's fair to have a small part of the forum disable a much-loved feature just because we couldn't resize our wallpaper-sized signatures ^^

[quote="Azdgari"]That's still really liberal compared to a lot of sites.[/quote]

True, I looked at what other forums were doing in this regard and settled on a sig area limit almost double that of the other forums. It may seem like a small area, but that's just because we had such a huge area limit previously.

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]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.[/quote]

None of the staff have noticed members whose sigs exceeded the previous limits. If you saw people exceeding those limits then you should have reported them - and not complain later on that nothing was done about it.

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Or just make a rule not to have animated sigs. [/quote]

While that rule may come in the future, I've gotten no complaints (besides you just now) about animated sigs. Therefore I assume it's not much of an issue.

[quote="FlipMode"]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.[/quote]

qft

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]It would be a lot more effective at eliminating distractions than putting this oppressive new rule into practice, and a lot easier to moderate.[/quote]

You're not being oppressed, Snowy. It's an internet forum that changed its signature rules...

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]If all you want is one pic, then you won't really care, but those of us who see sigs as something more than just a place to put one pic, and use it as a place also to post links to some of our fanfictions and such (which is something that helps bring more activity to the site, HELLO!) suddenly have to either stop doing that, or put freaking tiny pictures in to make up for the lost space.[/quote]

Remember that text and spoiler tags are not counted towards this total. As far as I know, I believe the internet allows you to create links out of text, and not only images. Just a theory, I'm not sure though.

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Good idea! And we totally don't have to resize nearly ALL of our sigs- oh wait... [/quote]

Lol, if you shrunk your signature's height by 2 pixels, your sig would fit inside the new area limit.

[SuperBabySimba]

Thank you. This is so much better.

This is a discussion forum wherein the discussion posts should be the more important and the first thing we pay attention to and not the (graphic) signatures.

Also, people here really need to get used to what the concept of a signature really means: A signature is meant to be of lesser/smaller content than the actual text that it's a signature to because it's supposed to be a small addition after the real content and not the main event. And yet even with this new size limit, here it still remains bigger than it normally is meant to be and thus bigger than most forums allow. I consider this decreased size already in itself as a compromise: It's still too big for a signature but at least it's much less distracting from the true content of the forum.

Plus, now people will hopefully come to see how much more impressive and effective a graphic signature is when you don't stuff it full of images but stick to only couple of really great and meaningful ones. And if they are chosen well, the smaller size wouldn't matter. And there will still be well enough room for links and text.

This is great. Thank you for the change in the rule.


[quote="Moka"]
[quote="Simbaholic"]Waaaaat.. that's far too small. [/quote]

Actually, if you shrunk your main image just 30 pixels and moved Simba down by your mood buttons, your signature will fit just fine :3[/quote]

But they have well over 100 pixeld height of text under those images, so it would be way too heigh, unless I'm counting completely wrong?

[SnowyCheetah]

Some people have a different view of what a signature really is than others. Those who view signatures as unimportant (like you) won't care, and are going to be in favor of the new rule (which I repeat is COMPLETELY unnecessary, especially when it results from neglect of the old rule, which was a reasonable one). Those who view signatures as a way to unintrusively promote their own and others' threads, and stuff like that, are going to be very unhappy with it because it's either have a small image, or an even smaller image plus what little space is left to promote threads (WHICH BRINGS ACTIVITY TO THE FORUM!).

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Some people have a different view of what a signature really is than others. Those who view signatures as unimportant (like you) won't care, and are going to be in favor of the new rule (which I repeat is COMPLETELY unnecessary, especially when it results from neglect of the old rule, which was a reasonable one). Those who view signatures as a way to unintrusively promote their own and others' threads, and stuff like that, are going to be very unhappy with it because it's either have a small image, or an even smaller image plus what little space is left to promote threads (WHICH BRINGS ACTIVITY TO THE FORUM!).[/quote]

I think you're over-reacting. I understand that different people have different view of what a signature really is but best if we tried to respect what it most commonly is, which is not what it has previously been here.

As for the promoting threads... This forum doesn't have an activity problem. And I'd bet my life savings on that signature link promotion is not an essential reason for it. TLK is a timeless fandom and this forum is huge in member amount. That's all it takes to make an active forum. Not to mention that those promoting links you speak of likely haven't been much spotted anyway, among the huge and/or twenty pictures people stuff into their sigs.

[MalibuTrashDog]

This is tempting me to do something really ridiculous. >8 )

[WildSimba]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Some people have a different view of what a signature really is than others. Those who view signatures as unimportant (like you) won't care, and are going to be in favor of the new rule (which I repeat is COMPLETELY unnecessary, especially when it results from neglect of the old rule, which was a reasonable one). Those who view signatures as a way to unintrusively promote their own and others' threads, and stuff like that, are going to be very unhappy with it because it's either have a small image, or an even smaller image plus what little space is left to promote threads (WHICH BRINGS ACTIVITY TO THE FORUM!).[/quote]

He said text doesn't count. You don't need an image just to post an AD for something into your signature. You just put it as a URL in your signature, and then it's completely fine. You can also put them inside spoiler tags.

[quote="SillydogTheGreat"]This is tempting me to do something really ridiculous. >8 )[/quote]

I swear, I'm gonna find a way to exceed this limit, without technecally breaking the rule. x)