Signature Pics? Limit the size? Yes or No

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Polls - Everything Else...
-- Signature Pics? Limit the size? Yes or No
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Posted by DJ Sarah H on Jan-21-2002 22:54:

SIGNARTURE PICS? limit the size ? Yes or No ?

Hi all,
seems we have a couple of threads asking to reduce the size of pics in signatures.
Understandably a problem for the 56k users of the TA forums.

Vote here for yes or no to reduce or limit the size of images allowd in signatures.

I voted No, cos i think that the sig images add colour and variety to the forums and also demonstrate how talented some of you guys are

Posted by Spad on Jan-22-2002 00:30:

No, I could understand people complaining if it wasn't possible to disable them but it is. If you don't like them then turn them off, simple. It's like saying you don't like yogart therefore shops should stop selling it.

Posted by Bizz on Jan-22-2002 03:31:

I voted no, because sigs really liven up the forums... but, some peeps need to be a little considerate and avoid using huge animated gifs (or maximum quality jpegs) in excess of half a meg (and more so hosting them on an unresponsive or slow server).

Posted by Mark on Jan-22-2002 03:59:

no! like mentioned before, there is an option to ignore the sigs altogether.

Posted by Coup on Jan-22-2002 07:45:

ive added another option, coz pictures arnt really too bad but its the .gif's which queer everywhere up, all the colours and moving stuff and blah in sigs in the past, thats my view atleast and as im mod then that what goes! lol!

Posted by Sir. Lunchalot on Jan-22-2002 11:00:

I think most of the people on this bord have broadband and broadband is expanding really fast, so the problem we`re talking about is getting smaller every day. Within a year this problem will have solved itsself. Untill then the remaining 56k modem users can turn off the signatures in their profile, since (imo) it`s less an effort than everyone making a new sig.

That`s why I voted: No

Posted by Oxygen on Jan-22-2002 13:21:

No, I don't mind. As long as there are no insulting sigs or anything.

Posted by Bizz on Jan-22-2002 13:46:

quote:
Originally posted by Coup
ive added another option, coz pictures arnt really too bad but its the .gif's which queer everywhere up, all the colours and moving stuff and blah in sigs in the past, thats my view atleast and as im mod then that what goes! lol!

Static gifs are definitely OK though, because they take a lot less space than jpgs. Animated gifs, like you said, can get out of hand. (Maybe change option three to say this instead?)

Posted by Fraggle on Jan-22-2002 13:47:

hehehe, ya i like the sigs

i admit i have cable, but even when i have 56k connection in my other house i don't mind the d/l for the sigs

...and yep, there *is* the option to not show sigs in ur profile

Posted by Blik on Jan-22-2002 14:54:

I also voted no

I only care about the ones that are 500 kb big......those are just way too much

Posted by Blik on Jan-22-2002 14:56:

gat a question, my sig contains gifs, but they are small, maximum is 42 kb, does it slow peeps computer down??

Posted by TimeportE on Jan-22-2002 15:50:

i voted that big gif should be deleted, a sig shouldn't take to much space. I limited my sig to almost 29 k (if i'm correct), that's almost nothing even to 56 modems.. maybe the quality isn't as good but who cares.. btw.. Blik when i still had a 56 you sigs didn't slow me down at all!!

Posted by eXeTik on Jan-22-2002 19:10:

Guys... sigs are meant to set individuality for each user. that's all good as we all like sigs. The thing is that no all of us are located on a High speed connection- Speaking of myself as an example... Im on a double ISDN and while i browse the board i sometimes bump into huge sigs like TuFace for example... it stucks up my IE cuz IE tries to load the huge amount of data while i brose over it.

Sigs are all good but as in most communities, rules regarding to sigs dimenisions and size should be set so all the slow connection users won't suffer.

It's not fair to say "Then disable the show sig option in CP" cuz slow connection owners like to enjoy sigs aswell, and it's not much to ask to reduce the size of the huge sigs on this board, Heck- Most of the communities im a part of (and that's alot ) force somewhere arround 20-30kb limit, though as in this case you could even set a 40k limit- as long as all those huge sigs will be removed...

Cheers

Posted by dig2k on Jan-22-2002 23:40:

I don't think ppl should be restricted to any particular image format. Different image formats are better according to the contents. If you use a program such as fireworks u will c sumtimes jpg is more appropriate, sumtimes gif etc. Obviously image formats such as bmp are always bad 4 the web!

The odd person has an annoying animated gif... often with bright colours changing every second... we could do with less of this...

The size of images should be constrained not only to ensure faster browsing of the forums for users with lower bandwidths but also so u can c more text on screen... sumtimes ppl hav huge images followed by lists of songs they like followed by requests... this can take up more than a 1024x768 screen just by itself!

So basically I voted yes...

Posted by jon on Jan-23-2002 09:42:

I voted no, imm a 56 k user, have no trouble reading peoples sigs.

Jon

Posted by Kia Kaha on Jan-23-2002 09:44:

Well I'm on a humble 56K cos that's still all that's available in large parts of the UK ... I love the sigs on the whole and would hate to see them go ... but I agree there needs to be some kind of limit on file size (maybe a smallish animated gif or a medium size jpg) as well as maybe limit the actual physical size of the final image, cos as Dig2k says some people's sigs take up an entire screen.

Posted by eXos on Jan-23-2002 15:47:

I don't mind really. I have a fast connection, so I don't mind. And there's an option in your profile where you can disable signatures.

Posted by flystyler on Jan-23-2002 15:53:

I think there should b no gifs, or atleast no large gifs, as i know that large gifs can leed to internet explorer freezing, but then i have learnt my lesson, lol

Posted by Gekhous on Jan-23-2002 22:56:

i voted yes... but it doesnt bother me that much, cuz i disabled them...

Posted by Tony Morello on Jan-25-2002 03:20:

i don't mind the sigs...
i'm not sure if mine was one of the ones that peeps had probs with...
anywho...
i think i'm done for now...

Posted by Evil Teef on Jan-25-2002 23:42:

it doesnt botter me i have cable

Posted by nomatteus on Jan-26-2002 08:20:

dsl so i dun care

Posted by Lilith on Jan-26-2002 11:35:

I think a size limit of about 240 high x 450 long pixels should suffice, besides, sigs are just a carry over from bbs where you didnt have a user profile, unlike ubb where people can click your profile to find out about you.
Theres a few other personal greivances I have with some sigs, mostly because they IMO are 'ugly' and take up half the screen!
My resolution is 1150 x 860 so its not like Im using an old 15' monitor and I still get half the screen full of some dumb image and 10 lines of text about some rubbish Im not interested in.

Then just to really annoy me, the user types in half a sentance of offhanded dribble so I can get the full 1150x860 pixels in 32bit colour dribble

Posted by inatrance on Jan-31-2002 14:39:

quote:
No, I could understand people complaining if it wasn't possible to disable them but it is. If you don't like them then turn them off, simple. It's like saying you don't like yogart therefore shops should stop selling it.

halleliuyah spad! preach on brotha!

Posted by ABTsportsline on Feb-01-2002 08:47:

quote:
Originally posted by jonsimmonds
I voted no, imm a 56 k user, have no trouble reading peoples sigs.

Jon

DITTO!

i am on 56K (my laptop) and i have no real problem with any sigs. I can't see what the problem is... unless whoever complained is not on 56K and is on like 14.4k instead!

Anyway, i don't have a problem.

-ABT-

Pages (2): [1] 2 »