Signatures
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25733
Printed Date: December 02 2024 at 03:31
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Signatures
Posted By: Aaron
Subject: Signatures
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 09:25
|
now, i am not one for signatures as it is, and maybe this is some internet debate that has gone on for quite some time, but i think some of the stuff in the signatures is too much, i would like to see it just be text, but i doubt i will win that, just a few suggestions
1. limit the size of the images, images larger than ones post seems bizarre to me, especially when one has to scroll out to see the entire thing
2. images that have something to do with the member more directly, such as interests maybe, not general interests
the second one is why i am posting this,
nothing against ivan0frost, but the picture of some hot chick in his sig. is unecessary. When I am browsing at home or especially at work, i don't need someone coming in and seeing a scantaly clad woman on my screen when i am posting on a message board or thread that is not related to that picture, for obvious reasons. I don't need them to think I am a perv.
edit: i chopped off the end bit
Aaron
|
Replies:
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 09:37
 ------------- 
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 09:40
wait... I think Im missing something... are you saying youre a perv???? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Aaron
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 09:57
|
not really, who doesn't like looking at woman, but i prefer to do it on my own time i don't want it when it is not expected i don't see a difference between a nude chick and a chick with a bikini, it is selling the same thing, and i have no interest in seeing that in certain situations
Aaron
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 10:15
|
^I do not see any problem with Ivanfrost's signature.At least from your perspective. plus how can someone think you are a perv when it isn't you with the babe picture (let them think ivan's a perv  )counter-arguments to your general view: you doubt well that you'll not win this debate,as this forum allows more than simple text messages.this is actually,speaking metaforically,a place where members,through sigs,can create a personal image or a notable reference. signature is something subjective,therefore the member decides if it's a general thing or a personal thing. limitations of image sizes or of sig lenght do exist. --- in my opinion,and with all the respect,the motives you give aren't really inappropriate. You can report a signature that exceed limits or you can report that your browser doesn't support such signature (but in that case,you have to do changes,not all of us)  -------------
|
Posted By: Aaron
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 10:34
|
i don't really have a problem with pictures, i think the oversized ones are kind of annoying, the subject matter is not really a big deal, but i don't think people would realize i am posting on a message board right away, at a quick glance maybe you are right though, there are boobs and butts all over the internet, no matter where i go
Aaron
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 10:39
|
< that's the spirit
-------------
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 10:39
I think ivanfr0st's new sig is much more pleasant to watch than his previous ones. Does that mean I'm a perv? 
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 11:13
|
I've been saying for ages that large pictures in sigs should be banned, they just slow down the loading of the pages. And having scantily clad chicks in bikinis could be a definite embarrasment if the wrong person walked past my PC while I was in the forum at lunchtime! |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 11:17
|
Aaron,
Two days ago, you were derogatory against homosexuals (much to IvanFrost's displeasure) using the term gay as lame and now you seem to backtrack by not liking his scantily clad woman!!! Make-up your mind, young man: you gay or not?
    All kidding aside, guys!!!!!!
  I have to agree that some signatures are a pain to the eyes after repeated viewings and repeated postings on the same thread.
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: Trickster F.
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 11:26
This is such a gay thread( ...), but okay, I completely understand your point of view and I shall change my signature. There really is no specific rule about this on the website, and I personally see why you wouldn't just PM me, asking to change the signature, instead of raising a discussion that many people found confusing.
Mind you, beside you the reaction to the new signature was especially great.
-- Ivan ------------- sig |
Posted By: NutterAlert
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 11:30
|
i've PM'ed the site owners asking if we can have flash, MPEG4 or IPTV feeds for our sig's.....then we could really ramp it up a notch or two. ------------- Proud to be an un-banned member since 2005 |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 11:58
A short film as a signature would be nice. 
|
Posted By: Aaron
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 16:26
|
you didn't have to take it down Ivan, that is up to you unless the board rules change, although i do appreciate it, i didn't PM you because for one i don't generally PM anybody and two i was just using yours as an example, there are others Aaron
|
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 16:54
Sure, but NO WALRUSES!  ------------- Pure Brilliance: 
|
Vompatti wrote:Posted By: aapatsos
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 19:27
I liked your Immortal one 
|
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: July 07 2006 at 19:32
|
I agree with Aaron.
These big signatures are just plain irritating.However I think the Last FM style playlists,whilst a tad "clunky" are obviously apt for this type of forum. Frosty's old sig pics gave me the creeps though... |
Posted By: Trickster F.
Date Posted: July 10 2006 at 08:11
I'm not perverted, I just happen to like women, much like most other men.
-- Ivan ------------- sig |
Posted By: goose
Date Posted: July 10 2006 at 19:06
| On most message boards there's an option to hide everyone's signature, and I use it without fail. I never like scrolling past the same thing over and over! |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 12:50
|
Aaron's concern re photos of scantily clad women suddenly appearing on his work (or even home) computer is real, and completely legitimate, as anyone with much work experience (or even a modicum of intuition) would know. Whether we like viewing attactive human bodies is one thing, but having them unpredictably appear on a music forum is quite another.
(Thus I wouldn't view the "eye candy" thread at work, but I should not be afraid to view a thread on Pink Floyd for fear of encountering pics of people in their underwear (swimsuits).
If I want to view such things, on my own time, and in privacy, I can readily do so via other sites devoted to just that purpose.
 And yes, huge sig pics are rather silly, borderline rude re "netiquette" and boring, for me (the Garfield cartoon, etc, might be amusing to view once). ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 13:43
|
I wouldn't mind having text only signatures, but the character limit should be increased. I made my grammar sig into an image because I didn't have the room to say everything I wanted to say in 200 characters. However, I would be fine with it just being text if I had enough room. It would be nice if the image restrictions were a bit tighter. (I know this sounds somewhat ridiculous with my current sig, but I like that picture, and it's a tribute to Syd. I wouldn't mind reducing it if I had to, but since I don't have to I'm not going to.) ------------- "Never forget that the human race with technology is like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine." Sleepytime Gorilla Museum: Because in their hearts, everyone secretly loves the Unabomber. |
Posted By: The Wizard
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 13:45
|
I wist the text limit could be increased, but that's just me. -------------  
|
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: July 12 2006 at 23:26
Sometimes less is more. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Trickster F.
Date Posted: July 13 2006 at 11:27
You can not really describe an album in 50-75 words, no matter how much you try.
-- Ivan ------------- sig |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 15 2006 at 04:52
Are the reviews not made for that? Do you need to review albums in your sig?
Short and concise is best ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: d.o.k
Date Posted: August 09 2006 at 19:35
|
Indeed, huge signatures are VERY borring. Strangely, avatar cannot exceed 64x64 pixels while it could be... let's say 150x150, but signatures with picture or huge details of what people are listening (like lastfm...) are so annoying.  Sadly, it is impossible to deactivate the loading of signatures in the settings  ------------- my band : http://lgab.tk - http://lgab.tk |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 09:55
|
One other point about signatures - if you change your sig, all previous sigs get changed, yea, even back to the dawn of time (or whenever you started posting here, whichever is the later ) - which is a bit irritating, if you change sigs every now & then out of boredom. Is this an unavoidable quirk of the forum software, or is it possible to set it so that past sigs are fixed, and only future ones change? ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS 
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 09:59
I can't possibly imagine such a thing. The memory of a sig is maintained strictly to the present time and to the present form of your sig. It's not about the posts of the pasts, it's not even about posts, it's about you, the member, what the sig represents. So when you do the change of sigs, perfectly natural is to cope everywhere, anywhere with that sig... (that or I'm really tired and can't understand entirely the issue...  )-------------
|
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 20:24
|
I think Web Wiz Forums only go to max 200 character by default. I could be wrong. ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH 
|
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 20:28
|
MPEG4 files may not be compatible with all plug ins, cause usually you need a Quicktime player to do that, however if you have VideoLAN a media player, it does a lot of things ranging from MP4, DVD, MP3 etc all in one package no need to get extra codecs really. K-Lite Codec, good if you want to play MP4 in Windows Media Player etc and much more. ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH
|