or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › Feedback › No images in the signatures
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No images in the signatures

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
The sleek new looked is defiled by the idiotic pictures in signatures.

Let's have a contest to see who can make the ugliest image signature.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #2 of 48
berf? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
post #3 of 48
The signatures should have color guidelines. Like Synotic's, his is good.
post #4 of 48
Thread Starter 
None are good, they all suck.

They make the damn boards look like PicPie or some other flirty chat board infested with sub-16 year olds.

Oh wait. . .
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #5 of 48
Alright, I agree, sort of. No image signatures.
post #6 of 48
I was just coming in to start a thread on this exact subject- I'm surprised and pleased to see that somebody else thinks that photo sigs are stupid.

Ban 'em!

No Photo Sigs!
- Mojo the Monkey
Reply
- Mojo the Monkey
Reply
post #7 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:
<strong>berf? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>


Oh, and one more thing.

Nebagakid, what makes you think that I care that your post count is about 283? Do those extra 270 posts confer some special status upon you? Do they make you more attractive to the gender of your choice? Do they make your hair shiny and strong?

Bragging about post counts is also dumb. I think that the post-counting feature should be disabled, too.
- Mojo the Monkey
Reply
- Mojo the Monkey
Reply
post #8 of 48


i don't like 'em either. We may bring them back, with a size restriction. but our classy new look is definitely broken up BIG TIME by sigs...


so they are (OFF) for now
post #9 of 48
Ha ha. My reverse psychology worked!

Leave the image sigs at MacNN.
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
art may imitate life, but life imitates tv.
Reply
post #10 of 48
we're actually going to turn them back on, but keep them small (140x35) and non-animated. Also, we'll do something about ones that are hugely loud or obnoxious... we'd like to discourage them, but allow for freedom of expression.
post #11 of 48
image sigs are atrocious evil things. look for instance at the macnn forums. you might say that the worst thing about them is that they allow image sigs. all they cause is problems. (though i guess you could also say that that forum staff over at macnn which allows the image sigs is pretty bad, too)
in short, Leave the image sigs at MacNN!

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: flowerbob ]</p>
"."
Reply
"."
Reply
post #12 of 48
No image sigs! Period.
The sleek look just gets ruined by them.
Actually, if you really really want them, we should elect a panel to decide whether or not a sig is acceptable. It'll keep the rif raf out.
post #13 of 48
How's this?

Yessss. Beautiful!

-AYB

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: JFW ]</p>
rm -rf /bin/laden
Reply
rm -rf /bin/laden
Reply
post #14 of 48
Thread Starter 
There is ample room for freedom of expression inside the text box. If the poster is unable to get his/her point across in their prose then their image signature will most likely be annoying.

And those that re-announce their name, as if we can't read it when it's right next to the post.

proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #15 of 48
[quote]rm -rf /bin/laden<hr></blockquote>
That's a good signature. No need for the silly animated gif there.
post #16 of 48
There always has to be some un-artistic PC user bitching about no pic sig usage.
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #17 of 48
Thread Starter 
It's a good thing you have your name right after your post, sinewave, I almost missed reading it on the left.

Turn this stupid crap off, it has never been on at AI before and there's no reason for it to be on now. It's visual clutter and it's entirely useless.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #18 of 48
Being Mac users we are attracted by such visual nonsense.
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #19 of 48
i'm going to post a poll in General Discussion.

we shall let the people decide.
post #20 of 48
groverat... sit on a pillow.. it'll stop that damn stick from entering your anus

: )
post #21 of 48
Sleek new look? I come to a message board to read what people say, not stare at the interface!! (sidenote: UBB sucks, get vB instead). The images help you learn who is who, and provide visual feedback. Since with such small files the loading time doesn't increase much, and such small size means the page isn't broken much, then there's not much of a problem

Amorya

(Yeah, I know I said I'd give up on this, but it's a different thread... )
post #22 of 48
part of the argument against image sigs, Amorya, can be seen right in your post. You see your name 3 times within the space of 2 inches. On the left, signed, and image signature. The problem with image sigs, in my mind at least, is that they tend to be redundant for the most part...

but thats IMO. whether or not we keep them will be decided by the poll.
post #23 of 48
Not to mention sig images should be stored in your cache and wont effect loading time


Being Politically Correct is retarded.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #24 of 48
*Was originally meant for the Poll: Image Signatures thread but someone went and locked it just before I could click submit!*

/climbs onto a soapbox

I think the idea of a sig approval committee is workable. Sigs would have to be adherent to certain limitations and rules in order to be used. The size requirement is a definite but what else? Personally, I think forcing sigs to be black&white only is stupid and something that went out with the 80s. Why not just dis-allow certain colors? The kind of colors that would conflict with the AI interface. Remember, sigs shouldn't try to direct your attention to themselves, just serve as a helpful place marker. Also, sigs with a single background color should just be made transparent so it won't conflict with the forum background.

If a sig approval committee is formed it should consist of as few people as possible. Say just 3? And in order to have your sig approved all 3 members must be in agreement, no 2/3s majority on this. Anything else?

/climbs off soapbox

P.S. Another idea is to dump sigs altogether and just go with avatars. As of version 6.1 UBB supports avatars. I know, I run one myself.
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
post #25 of 48
I have to agree that image sigs break up the continuity of the forums, but I still like 'my' image sig
post #26 of 48


The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #27 of 48
There's still hope for avatars. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[Cheers]" />
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
post #28 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by Trekkie:
<strong>There's still hope for avatars. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[Cheers]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

no, no there isn't.
post #29 of 48
There seems to be a attack of the locked threads in here.
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #30 of 48
Thread Starter 
I prefer that to deleted posts and content edited by moderators.

Go away if you can't leave MacMonkey behind.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #31 of 48
Oh I am sure that you do just fine here grover Anything that isn't PC or goes a long with AI mods gets locked it seems



[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #32 of 48
Thread Starter 
What are you talking about?

What un-PC threads have been locked?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #33 of 48
perhaps @ the old AI...

you're just mad about the signature popular opinion is counter yours...
post #34 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>What are you talking about?

What un-PC threads have been locked?</strong><hr></blockquote>

In AI past

The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #35 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>perhaps @ the old AI...

you're just mad about the signature popular opinion is counter yours...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually it was about even And it doesn't really matter I can still use my sig

The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
The crucial memorandum will be snared in the out-basket by
the paper clip of the overlying memo and go to file.
Reply
post #36 of 48
exactly.
post #37 of 48
Thread Starter 
Oh, you mean the threads that were against the posting guidelines that you agreed to while registering that nickname?
Ok

proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #38 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>we're actually going to turn them back on, but keep them small (140x35) and non-animated. Also, we'll do something about ones that are hugely loud or obnoxious... we'd like to discourage them, but allow for freedom of expression.</strong><hr></blockquote>

NOOOOOOOOO

even when they are small, a page full of sigs has much more latency, as my browser struggles to contact everyone's different web server just to read a single lousy 10 K gif. Even on broadband, a page full of images from a dozen different servers is going to load TOO damn slow.

Even worse, sometimes these wonderful free webservers are down and it takes even longer for the page to load!

MacNN drives me crazy for this very reason.

"cast off the frivolities of thy youth"

like so many others have said - be creative with your words. If you want to show off your Photoshop skilz, post a link to your portfolio.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #39 of 48
this is why they're off
post #40 of 48
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>

no, no there isn't.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
That's the problem with changing the past. You never get to say "I told you so".
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Feedback
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › Feedback › No images in the signatures