dmelviØØ7 Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 and yet it's still taller then some with pictures!vote NO on 150px.Yeah, how the hell does that work? I must be dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gioseppe Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Yeah, how the hell does that work? I must be dumb.you press that lovely enter key for than once IIRC lol danny.btw, if someone was on dialup and was struggling with loading signatures, they can always turn then off, along with the avatars (but then again, you already knew that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gage Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 And Fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottlecap Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 (edited) ...why not do it by area? that would at least let people keep aspect ratios or let people be a few px over in one dimension if they were a few shorter in the other. also, since you're making this rule, how about making another to get rid of vids and animated sigs? they take longer to load than a simple image and are much more distracting.just two ideas for your consideration, otherwise no complaints here.-mike Edited January 9, 2007 by bottlecap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piglet Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 A small sig pic is still better than no sig pic like that other Volvo forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Mendoza Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Fixed. And the mod information is short since... well, there are no real mods :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 A small sig pic is still better than no sig pic like that other Volvo forumwerd. I personally think the new restraints are perfect. It has less to do with loading the page and more to do with having less to scroll up and down through, methinks. The width restriction is there just so that people on tiny laptops or anyone one else who's not rocking a huge display don't have to scroll sideways when one person decides the majesty of their signature can only be appreciated in super widescreen 1024x150 pixel glory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibim Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Busy updating it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibim Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Updated, Whats the deal with the text underneath? okay or must it go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdizzle Posted January 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Updated, Whats the deal with the text underneath? okay or must it go?Looks fine.and yet it's still taller then some with pictures!vote NO on 150px.There isn't a vote. It is what it is and it will be enforced. There is no reason you need to have a sig that big. It serves no purpose other than to eat up bandwidth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldebaran Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oreo931 Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 mine is too boring and too dark, but its the best i could come up with at work...time go to take more pictures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oreo931 Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 mine is too boring and too dark, but its the best i could come up with at work...time go to take more pictures!GOTIT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormtrooper1 Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 I find it interesting how many people think this is open for disscussion, and if they don't like it, or if they think their current pic is "good enough" that they can just ignore the new rule.Funny thing is, it's a rule they are going to enforce, they gave us a warning, and a few days before they replaced everyones pics. They could have said starting now, and replaced them all.They could just ban us all and start a new board. Thankfully this board is so much less a popularity contest with the owner then others i have been on.It doesnt matter if you sig pic is 50 tall and 800 wide. that throws off the formatting, and like was mentioned here, if you dont have a big display, its a pain.so if your pic is 210 tall don't be surprised when it gets replaced. 600X150 max means if any size is over that, then it's too big.</end rant> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdizzle Posted January 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 I find it interesting how many people think this is open for disscussion, and if they don't like it, or if they think their current pic is "good enough" that they can just ignore the new rule.Funny thing is, it's a rule they are going to enforce, they gave us a warning, and a few days before they replaced everyones pics. They could have said starting now, and replaced them all.They could just ban us all and start a new board. Thankfully this board is so much less a popularity contest with the owner then others i have been on.It doesnt matter if you sig pic is 50 tall and 800 wide. that throws off the formatting, and like was mentioned here, if you dont have a big display, its a pain.so if your pic is 210 tall don't be surprised when it gets replaced. 600X150 max means if any size is over that, then it's too big.</end rant>:wub: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts