Author Topic: Signatures  (Read 18179 times)

eradicator

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 585
Re: Signatures
« Reply #20 on: October 30, 2007, 06:24:05 PM »
Why do you need pics in your sig?, thats what your avatar is for. Duh

sk89q

  • Global Moderator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Signatures
« Reply #21 on: October 30, 2007, 09:46:33 PM »
The avatar is too small.

JpKool

  • Stingray
  • Posts: 96
Re: Signatures
« Reply #22 on: October 31, 2007, 09:54:06 AM »
Well Knack that only proves the point u like to abuse power whats next????

KnacK

  • Global Moderator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 3039
Re: Signatures
« Reply #23 on: October 31, 2007, 10:54:52 AM »
Well Knack that only proves the point u like to abuse power whats next????

I'm just showing my affection towards you Jp ;D

JpKool

  • Stingray
  • Posts: 96
Re: Signatures
« Reply #24 on: October 31, 2007, 01:37:11 PM »
HAHAHAHAHA its all good lol. So is there anyway we can look forward to having signatures in the forums?

QueeNiE

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 435
Re: Signatures
« Reply #25 on: October 31, 2007, 04:15:29 PM »
One way to solve this:


Require a post count of greater than <number> in order to use this feature.

Eiii

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 4595
Re: Signatures
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2007, 04:45:12 PM »
No. No. NO. That'd increase the number of spammy posts tenfold.

TWENTYFOLD, MAYBE.

QueeNiE

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 435
Re: Signatures
« Reply #27 on: October 31, 2007, 04:53:09 PM »
Would it really?


Most of the people on this forum that would actually want to use a picture in their signature probably have enough pots already.  If your just starting on the forums with 1 or 2 posts, most likely you aren't going to be willing to post over 100 posts just to put a picture in your signature.


Or maybe you can hide this feature, kind of like the 1337 posts = leet.  It won't tell you until you actually reach the specified post count. :P

eradicator

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 585
Re: Signatures
« Reply #28 on: October 31, 2007, 06:57:00 PM »
Just let it go.
Knack has a good point to put this away:
One way to solve this:


Require a post count of greater than <number> in order to use this feature.

No. No. NO. That'd increase the number of spammy posts tenfold.

TWENTYFOLD, MAYBE.

Theres no doubt its gonna happen. besides having pictures that are bigger then the avatars just means that I and many others are gonna have to scroll through more pages which = annoying, dumb.

BTW happy Haloween!!!!!!!

QueeNiE

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 435
Re: Signatures
« Reply #29 on: October 31, 2007, 07:29:11 PM »
Yeah, but you can choose whether or not to view signatures.



sk89q

  • Global Moderator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Signatures
« Reply #30 on: October 31, 2007, 07:58:17 PM »
No one is going to spam to put a picture in their signature. I can tell you that from experience. It is so unimportant. Now, if 100 posts got you... the ability to fly, then hell yeah people would spam.

You can also put a join date limitation. That's also effective.

And @ eradicator, not only can you disable signatures, the number of pages would not be affected by the addition of signatures with images.

lekky

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 2449
Re: Signatures
« Reply #31 on: October 31, 2007, 08:33:34 PM »
And @ eradicator, not only can you disable signatures, the number of pages would not be affected by the addition of signatures with images.

He meant posts.

sk89q

  • Global Moderator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Signatures
« Reply #32 on: October 31, 2007, 09:34:55 PM »
He meant posts.

It wouldn't be posts either :P there would be no more posts. Just "more" was probably what he meant.


Fullmetal_Steeb

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 353
Re: Signatures
« Reply #33 on: November 01, 2007, 01:27:17 PM »
HAHAHAHAHA its all good lol. So is there anyway we can look forward to having signatures in the forums?
We DO have signatures in the forums...

ViciouZ

  • Map Committee
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 2227
Re: Signatures
« Reply #34 on: November 01, 2007, 03:18:12 PM »
20px limited pics would be nice, userbars are pretty, informative, and not annoying.

QueeNiE

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 435
Re: Signatures
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2007, 04:57:44 PM »
20px?  Your homosehcksual.   ;)


I need at least 300 to work it right.

sk89q

  • Global Moderator
  • Autococker
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Signatures
« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2007, 05:44:40 PM »
I'd say at LEAST < 200px. 100px wouldn't be bad. 300px is... huge.

QueeNiE

  • 68 Carbine
  • Posts: 435
Re: Signatures
« Reply #37 on: November 01, 2007, 05:46:52 PM »
300px isn't huge... :(

JpKool

  • Stingray
  • Posts: 96
Re: Signatures
« Reply #38 on: November 01, 2007, 05:47:28 PM »
We DO have signatures in the forums...

IMAGE SIGS WORDS ARE NOT SIGS GET IT RIGHT NOOBLET gawd u guys are slow. no graphix person would ever call useing words in ur sig box a sig ITS NOT WHAT IT IS FOR :P

y00tz

  • Autococker
  • Posts: 2742
Re: Signatures
« Reply #39 on: November 01, 2007, 05:48:40 PM »
300px is huge...
* Mike is so happy he has signatres hidden

300px in height, correct?
If QueeNiE had three posts on a page, much like in this thread, an entire screen's worth of pixels would be used just for his signature..