ITT we petition to shorten sigs.

Then live with it.

For example I could live with a few *****ing topic. But this one I don't like that much.

Perhaps I could ignore it! omg ;O;

isn't there an IPB mod that lets you hide individual sigs

or am i thinking of something else

Except your sig is a prime and perfect example of a real sig @ Binky.

I mean, if everyone had a sig like Binky, noone would complain.

This post has been edited by Elly on Jan 7 2007, 07:32 PM

Yeah! Think about us people with 800 by 600 res'!

All sigs cover my entire screen at this resoloution. I think my sig is a little big at times.

...dude.


How old is your computer?

there's also the matter of several hundred reports sitting unread in the queue

We got it in '98.

I can change the resoloution but then I can't play fangames.

This post has been edited by Mariotroid on Jan 7 2007, 07:55 PM

Yeah there is a mod for IPB 1.3 that does this, though the only one I can think of off the top of my head was custom-made by Simon Wai for S2Beta when it used to be called SWS2B. Of course, when Simon moved on, they went to 2.x, and I don't think the admins have a backup.

Anyways, I thought it was funny that people who have image-heavy and/or multiline text sigs are supporting something that will directly affect them

I love the "Don't like it? Ignore it" mindset.

What? Something's taking a really long time to load on this page, and it's in a person's signature because they're not even linking off their own server, but a server being leeched off of by half the internet? IGNORE IT!

Page is running slow because of it? IGNORE IT!

Can't ignore it? IGNORE IT!



Of COURSE you can't regulate EVERY SINGLE MEMBER'S signature. But every single member doesn't post regularly. Obviously we can see the signatures of people that post once in a while, and if they're really big then they disrupt a page/thread. Then they can be PMed, alerted, etc. etc.

However, I'm getting a little fed up with constantly PMing people about it and asking them to shorten their sig (and they end up getting rid of the smallest thing they can possibly find in their sig, instead of the largest). I enjoy signatures, and I don't want to disable them.

I think something in the rules or a sticky or SOMETHING can at least prevent some people from doing it in the first place. Or maybe people will see this thread before they do it.

Well obviously it's your fault for having an out-dated computer that can't load things fast enough to compensate.

God, Joey. Just God.

?

Well everybody seems to shorten their sigs everytime we have one of these topics.


Maybe just make one of these more often. :p

like spamming massive amounts of image macros doesn't stretch the screen or anything

...Yes? Not very large.

no, but there should be an OFFICIAL LIMIT that automatically shortens or stops the process of creating/changing signatures. C:

you can only feasibly shorten the character length of sigs, not the height.

Well, that's not entirely true, but it would only be approximate and there are many loopholes that could fool it.

Nonsense, you could put them in an HTML container element of a specific height that hides any overflow.
EDIT: Of course, the HTML tags in the signature itself would have to balance out, but they should do that right now anyway. And loopholing things is plenty reason to remove a member's signature, isn't it?


This post has been edited by Lightning on Jan 8 2007, 07:09 PM

There's a difference from checking and stopping an overly large signature, and simply obscuring part of it. While I'm not any super expert on the fixed height containers, wouldn't it still load all of the hidden content?

It would *load* it, yes, but it would be incentive for the user not to bother putting it there in the first place. Why make a huge signature if half of it is going to be invisible?

If someone is abusing signatures, why not make the abusive content invisible so the admins have to check every user in the topic to see who is causing it?