I would really like strictness on sig sizes, because a good majority of the people here have signatures that are ridiculously large and its rather annoying to have to scroll through all those huge sigs that serve almost no purpose.
I can't alter my signature anymore without having to take out either 2 of the quotes or the picture and a quote. My signature isn't tall, but I'm not being allowed to make it taller, anyway.
citricsquid your idea of a large signature is most other peoples idea of a regular signature. Personally my signature is buffed by the fact that the original image in my signature didn't scale very well and I have some links underneath it too.
Besides most of my posts would be bigger than my signature except when there isn't much to say. If I made a 1 line post then 15~px signature would be the limit - by your standards. However most of my posts aren't 1 line so it's not.
Your point is nullified by what I already said, unless there isn't much to talk about most of my posts are bigger than my signature. In that particular case I was expressing an opinion but there wasn't much to talk about. Same again with this post, I'm replying to a single argument that is fairly small.
I would actually consider my signature average or small in relation to everyone else's signatures. My post being shorter than my signature was only circumstantial; it depended on how big the post was, which constantly changes. "Too big" shouldn't be based on your posts unless you consistently post very short things or your signature is very tall, to the point where it always overwhelms your post.
So I wouldn't say mine is too big, simply because A) My posts are often larger than it, :cool.gif: It is MUCH smaller in relation to other people's, and C) It... really isn't tall; I would say mine is on the shorter side of average size.
Yeah, I could also resize mine easily, if required.
The picture limit is one thing, but it's also the lines of text. If we do some sort of equivalency, like X pixels of picture or X lines of regular-sized text, or a combination not exceeding X, that might balance it out.
So you could still do whatever, as long as you don't exceed the overall height.
Why don't we just throw in the old regulations, a maximum of 80 pixels height for images and only one image per signature? My siggie was made based on these rules, and it works fine for me. (I don't see how 80 pixels is too big, citricsquid, but everyone has their own opinions I guess.)
Thank god phpBB3 offers disabling avatars and signatures, improves the readability tenfold especially in this forum with all the dragcave links and image signatures.
add filter: http://dragcave.net/*
Will take out 60-70% of people's retarded signatures.
I've sent out PMs to people I've seen with big signatures and asked them to compress them.
Former #minecraft channel operator.
quatroking
A.I.
LG_LEgacy
Zuriki
why you need such large signatures is beyond me.
Besides most of my posts would be bigger than my signature except when there isn't much to say. If I made a 1 line post then 15~px signature would be the limit - by your standards. However most of my posts aren't 1 line so it's not.
So I wouldn't say mine is too big, simply because A) My posts are often larger than it, :cool.gif: It is MUCH smaller in relation to other people's, and C) It... really isn't tall; I would say mine is on the shorter side of average size.
The picture limit is one thing, but it's also the lines of text. If we do some sort of equivalency, like X pixels of picture or X lines of regular-sized text, or a combination not exceeding X, that might balance it out.
So you could still do whatever, as long as you don't exceed the overall height.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
Also, I wish we didn't have extended line spaces so I could mash a few images together into one but separate the links.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
Anyway yes Zuriki I would do that but I don't have access to.
Also, citricsquid, that was just harsh :sad.gif: