Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Moon Boots Sep 4 2008, 10:33 PM

Some people on this forum have very large signatures (sometimes with multiple pictures) which means that it takes a lot longer to read through a thread as you have to scroll down a long way to reach the next post. It also takes longer to load up each page for people with slower connections.

I'm not saying that signatures should be banned entirely, but I think placing a sensible limit on their size would be beneficial


Any thoughts?

Posted by: Emir Hot Sep 4 2008, 10:45 PM

I have never had one but I don't mind if somebody has. The ones with pictures are sometimes too much if the picture is really big.

Posted by: edguy Sep 4 2008, 10:47 PM

I think it is a good idea. Do you think my Picture is too big?

Edguy

Posted by: Moon Boots Sep 4 2008, 10:53 PM

QUOTE (edguy @ Sep 4 2008, 10:47 PM)

Posted by: DeepRoots Sep 4 2008, 11:02 PM

I hope people dont think mine is too big- was thinking of changing anyhow...

But...what grinds my gears is when somebodys sig is bigger than my screen. It may not be the world's biggest screen, but come on....some sigs are gigantic in relation to others- and while it doesn't pose any kind of threat to my bandwidth or the muscles in my finger as i scroll- it is still just plain annoying

Posted by: Juan M. Valero Sep 4 2008, 11:07 PM

I saw in other forums that there are an option to hide all signatures and to hide the signatures that you choose (there was a button after the signature near QUOTE and REPLY that says something like "HIDE SIGNATURE")

Posted by: Tuubsu Sep 4 2008, 11:08 PM

I faintly remember, we once had a small talk about this very same subject some time ago, long time actually I can't believe I still remember it... But anyhow it resulted in me and some other dudes having to "Resize" there signatures.

I was all for it then and I'm all for it now.

Posted by: Fran Sep 4 2008, 11:18 PM

None of the sigs in this thread are problematic in my opinion, so I guess we all agree so far!
Deeproot's has a lot of pics, but they are small and not wider than my screen so it's fine in my book, plus it looks cool . Worst problem when it comes to pics in sigs is when they are too wide, because they could make the post hard to read.

Anyhow I'd say 99% of the sigs in the forum are fine. As a matter of fact I can't remember anyone too big right now, good thing

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Sep 5 2008, 03:08 AM

We already have rule for this in the posting guidelines, in the past we have asked the worst offenders to change their sigs.

Posted by: Starry Manhattan Rain Sep 5 2008, 03:39 AM

QUOTE (Andrew Cockburn @ Sep 5 2008, 12:08 PM)

Posted by: Juan M. Valero Sep 5 2008, 07:41 AM

QUOTE (Starry Manhattan Rain @ Sep 5 2008, 04:39 AM)

Posted by: wrk Sep 5 2008, 08:19 AM

In "My Controls / Board Settings" is an option to turn off signatures.

I apologize for my ignorance on every bodies artwork, but a while back there were just to many colors altogether ...

Posted by: Kristofer Dahl Sep 5 2008, 09:20 AM

Actually I have been thinking about doing a poll about this for quite a while.

I do see some dissadvantages with the larger signatures - it harder to follow a discussion, especially if it consists of many shorter replies.

Also - if people do start to disable all signatures via the board controls - important signature info might get lost.

Posted by: Juan M. Valero Sep 5 2008, 11:23 AM

QUOTE (Kristofer Dahl @ Sep 5 2008, 10:20 AM)

Posted by: Ivan Milenkovic Sep 5 2008, 12:34 PM

Possibly some standardization would be in order

Posted by: Moon Boots Sep 5 2008, 01:00 PM

Kris makes a good point; turning off signatures altogether has it's disadvantages.

I'm conscious that having the moderators look out for big signatures takes up their time and is not efficient. On most of the forums that I visit they limit the size of signatures in the exact same way that GMC limits the size of avatars - when someone tries to enter a signature that is too big it is automatically rejected. Doing it this way would save wasting moderators time as it would stop the problem at it's core.

Any chance of this Kris?

Posted by: jacmoe Sep 5 2008, 03:18 PM

If the signatures get too big, I turn them off. No problems.
I turn them on every now and then, don't worry Juan.

I bet one can get an add on which auto-resizes huge signatures.

Posted by: kaznie_NL Sep 5 2008, 04:14 PM

I agree, sigs shouldn't be to big. It's quit hard to determine what's to big, and what's not. I think GMC staff should make a realy strong limit. So not "not very big" but like "no bigger then ...x... cm/...x...inch."

EDIT: Mine's quit big aswell I'll change it now.

Posted by: DeepRoots Sep 5 2008, 04:27 PM

Its real easy to keep them sized down- i upload all my images to photobucket- add the forum code to my sig, then go back into photobucket and adjust the size of them once i've had a chance to take a look at how big it has turned out.

Posted by: Kristofer Dahl Sep 7 2008, 01:36 PM

Ok I will ask our techs to find some kind of solution which allows us to control size of images in signatures.

We will allow one single standard banner image: 468 x 60 px maximum size.

Smells signature image is an example of that:

Posted by: Moon Boots Sep 7 2008, 03:19 PM

It's good to know that our suggestions are listened to - thanks Kris

Posted by: Bogdan Radovic Sep 8 2008, 12:28 PM

I somehow dig the signatures thing...I don't know , both sides make sense (harder to read and important info there)...Maybe some kind of compromise about the pictures in there...