Signatures

[SnowyCheetah]

^ that's your opinion.

Also, there's a third option. It's called ENFORCING THE RULE WE HAD! Unless this rule is going to be treated like the last one was, in which case there's no problem because we can all have our sigs as big as we want anyways. :3

[Moka]

[quote="Amanda"]The new maximum sig dimensions are way too small imo. I don't get what was wrong with the old rules at all. If people were breaking those rules, shouldn't they be punished and not us? If some of their sigs were "distracting", why don't those people get warnings instead of making the rest of us suffer? [/quote]

When did I say people were breaking the rules? People were following the rules, but the rules were too lenient, which resulted in gigantic, distracting signatures.

[quote="Amanda"]Also, what about next Christmas when people will want to display multiple sigs made by Secret Santas/friends to not make them feel bad...?[/quote]

Uhh... sig rotator?

[quote="Amanda"]Don't say we should shrink them because that usually reduces their quality (I've already shrunk my two Kiara sigs by a great deal and they look many times worse than they did originally).[/quote]

Yes, shrinking your existing signatures will reduce their quality. Shrinking the size of wallpapers shrinks their quality as well. With the new signature rules, graphic artists will simply adapt and make beautiful signatures geared towards the new dimensions.

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Also I'd like to point out that using the fact that other forums have even stricter rules for sigs, or disallow them completely, is not a valid argument to justify this new rule. It just means we're sinking to the level of the admins on those other sites who are too big a jerks to let people put a reasonable amount of what they want to down there.[/quote]

I don't think that's fair. Admins try to find a happy medium for signature size limits. Just because I took some advice from other administrators doesn't mean they're jerks or that I "sunk to their level." Some people have smaller screen resolutions and I don't think it's fair for them to have to see giant signatures that practically take up their entire screen. Think about it - a signature the size of 700x500 (our previous limit) takes up more than 70% of a screen with 800x600 resolution, which not only stretches out the forum and makes it unusable, but annoying to have to scroll through 500 pixels of signatures just to see the post each time. And yes I've gotten complaints. And don't say that they should disable signatures. I think we all can make a small sacrifice so that the forum can be enjoyed by all.

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Also, there's a third option. It's called ENFORCING THE RULE WE HAD! Unless this rule is going to be treated like the last one was, in which case there's no problem because we can all have our sigs as big as we want anyways. :3[/quote]

Please stop making the same argument 5 times in a row. This was my reply the first time you said that:

[quote="Moka"]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]

[FloraTheDarkFaerie]

*sighs* all this fuss over a signature. see what youve done Moka? I have no troubles with the new rule of course, but being a peacemaker myself im just saying. People are members of your site because they want to be. therefore surely its only common courtesy to let them expresss themselves through thier signatures? keep randomly changing the rules, and im afraid that you might start driving people away...

[SnowyCheetah]

^ you heard it here first, folks!

Well, graphic artists, enjoy resizing your freebies (which we spent a lot of time on), and your new lower-quality, smaller sigs. *goes to resize his*

We could have at least had a vote.

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]Also, there's a third option. It's called ENFORCING THE RULE WE HAD! Unless this rule is going to be treated like the last one was, in which case there's no problem because we can all have our sigs as big as we want anyways. :3[/quote]

You seem to miss the point. This change of rule isn't meant to be a punishment on anyone. It's for the good of the entire forum's purpose and the enjoyment of as many people as possible withouth prohibiting signatures completely.

[quote="KiaraKovu"]keep randomly changing the rules, and im afraid that you might start driving people away [/quote]

This wasn't a random change. There is a valid and perfectly sensible reason for this. And if it's the signatures people are here for instead of discussion TLK and enjoying the company of other fans, then I think they should reconsider their values.

[SnowyCheetah]

Hell of a 'compromise'

[Moka]

The last time rules were changed were on July 18th...we don't change the rules very often. People can still express themselves greatly with the current signature rules and believe or not - rules do need changing. The constitution of the USA has been amended many times because of this. If you're unhappy that rules need changing and amending in this world then you're going to be unhappy everywhere >.<

[SnowyCheetah]

Wow, a whole 575x275 to put a pic, some links, a userbar, maybe even some mood buttons!
but it has to be one at a time

Tell me Moka, what's wrong with my current sig as it is?

[Moka]

It exceeds the signature rules. That's what's wrong with it.

[SnowyCheetah]

Other than that?