Image Signatures - Vote Here

ghost_user_nameghost_user_name
Posted:
in Feedback edited January 2014
Should users be allowed to have image signatures?



If yes, note that such signatures would need to be less than 140x40 pixels in size and non-animated.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 37
    jambojambo Posts: 3,036member
    Coming from a 56k user - Nay!



    J :cool:
  • Reply 2 of 37
    willoughbywilloughby Posts: 1,457member
    Yes Yes Yes!



    This is coming from a DSL user however. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 3 of 37
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    No - I prefer a simpler, cleaner interface.
  • Reply 4 of 37
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    only if FERRO's icons are the max size... although ferro wouldn't even use his icons in the signerature area anyways b/c he likes to switch them up depending on the subject of his post... now that I think about it, if people want to do this they can add it to their post manually like Anders and Ferro do...

    no
  • Reply 5 of 37
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I think memebers should be able to have them.
  • Reply 6 of 37
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    so post count display is off but you're considering ****ing banners at the bottom of every post.





    great <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
  • Reply 7 of 37
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    eric, read the rest of the frickin top 6 threads in the forum...
  • Reply 8 of 37
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    No. It makes things look too busy, and I'd appreciate a bandwidth break on my 56k modem.
  • Reply 9 of 37
    krazyfoolkrazyfool Posts: 129member
    I'm on a cable and I still don't like them, so no thank you.
  • Reply 10 of 37
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Yes. But can´t you set a limit on the size of the file in kb instead of pixels and set it really low so we don´t have a problem with modem users (or at least a lesser problem)
  • Reply 11 of 37
    logan calelogan cale Posts: 1,281member
    No.
  • Reply 12 of 37
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    no, i like the clean aspect of these boards, and it's relative speed.
  • Reply 13 of 37
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    No.
  • Reply 14 of 37
    pushermanpusherman Posts: 410member
    no.



    of course, i could go into something here about how all signatures are stupid because it just breaks the flow of information, instead of reading a block of text, you have to jump over (sometimes excruciatingly long/stupid) signatures to get to the next post. anything that disrupts the flow of information should be there for a good reason. Sigs aren't a good reason. IP Logged isn't a good reason. edit/reply buttons are about the only thing that can really justify being in the way.



    [ 03-09-2002: Message edited by: poor taylor ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 37
    horned_froghorned_frog Posts: 577member
    Nope.
  • Reply 16 of 37
    falconfalcon Posts: 458member
    No
  • Reply 17 of 37
    cosmocosmo Posts: 662member
    I'm going to have to go with no
  • Reply 18 of 37
    graphitemangraphiteman Posts: 428member
    Well, my position has changed. I vote no. And I shall change my sig shortly.
  • Reply 19 of 37
    ryanthegreatryanthegreat Posts: 359member
    I'll say yes on this one. However there should be limits. If a sig is too large, the mods should warn the person to make it smaller.
  • Reply 20 of 37
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    no
Sign In or Register to comment.