Gfx appeal to admins... Pls...

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 23 Jan 2007, 18:44

Ok so I love making the odd new sig here and there, but it always nice to have a nice big picture and still a nice viewable quality so,

Would like to make an appeal to the admins to pls consider increasing the dimensions, not size, but dimensions of the current sig limit to maybe 450x150...

we can still manage with the 20kb limit so that would be fine... I mean having a 'bigger' sig at same size can't make that much difference... Ok I know it would make the pages huge, but not everyone will be doing it...

Pls, at least consider it...
Thanx

OTC

LordRage · Post by **LordRage** » 23 Jan 2007, 18:51

yeah I agree. I have a really nice sig that nrg_wp made for me as part of my clan and really it rocks, but I cant use it here cos its too big (dimensions wise) actually its also 77k

WiK1d · Post by **WiK1d** » 23 Jan 2007, 18:53

3 Votes. I also want an Upping. I feel that most of our users aren't on 56K anymore and Firefox/Opera/IE7?? cache's images so that isn't such a big problem anymore.

DarkStar · Post by **DarkStar** » 23 Jan 2007, 19:02

I don't see why it would cause a problem, so that's four votes

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 23 Jan 2007, 19:10

well Lord, more than sure that nrg can fix that one to fit the 20kb...

he also pretty good with the gfx... you should see his BF comics...

thanx guys for the support...

PsyCLown · Post by **PsyCLown** » 23 Jan 2007, 20:08

I also think a small size increase as well as a dimension increase should happen. Very few people are on 56K. Im currently using an internet connection where I download @ 0.5 - 0.8kb/s and the way I manage to load pages is that I use Opera and set it so that it loads all pages with cached images only. This normally does not distort the web page. If it does then you can each image seperatly or turn images on and it will load all images.

I manage to browse like that.

LinkX · Post by **LinkX** » 23 Jan 2007, 20:15

Off-The-Chart wrote: thanx guys for the support...

5 votes

DarkRanger · Post by **DarkRanger** » 23 Jan 2007, 21:39

6 votes...

Pino · Post by **Pino** » 23 Jan 2007, 21:54

WAJeff · Post by **WAJeff** » 23 Jan 2007, 22:09

8!
With added text though. Its even hard to squash in a link into your sig....even with tinyurl

NealeDeadlyAlien · Post by **NealeDeadlyAlien** » 23 Jan 2007, 23:06

9.....

naughty · Post by **naughty** » 23 Jan 2007, 23:17

aw what the heck ....make that 10

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 24 Jan 2007, 07:21

again, thanx peeps...

now let us hope we get same/some input from the higher ups...

kraven · Post by **kraven** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:21

11 votas!

rustypup · Post by **rustypup** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:32

-1

if it adds no value, why do it?... the pics are of more than sufficient size to provide identity...

aside from that, the most stunningly realised 1152 x 864 x 32 sig will not automatically make a spam post less spammy... if anything, i'd prefer a reduction.... that way we'd get more posts per page...this would reduce, by a significant margin, the stress incurred through those infamous "LOL!" / "ROFL!" type posts...

<scratches a horn and fiddles with the clasps on his hell-bound briefcase...>

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:41

does having bigger or smaller sigs really effect the number of posts per page?

how can that be? doesn't the amount of posts have something to do with how the board was set up?

but even so, I understand what you mean, and that is why I ask it to at least be considered...

Post by **Stuart** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:41

Off-The-Chart wrote:we can still manage with the 20kb limit so that would be fine... I mean having a 'bigger' sig at same size can't make that much difference... Ok I know it would make the pages huge, but not everyone will be doing it...

We can? Have you checked the size of your sig?

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:47

that better schase?

and your contribution?

I have seen a few okes with sigs only 1 or 2 kb's over limit, plus the fact that I have not received any email from a mod did not make me change it...

kraven · Post by **kraven** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:58

Off-The-Chart wrote: I have seen a few okes with sigs only 1 or 2 kb's over limit, plus the fact that I have not received any email from a mod did not make me change it...

That doesnt make it right. And this is not helping your case shhh..

@Rusty: Will it de-value the boards in any way. sort of a Why not(?) question.

rustypup · Post by **rustypup** » 24 Jan 2007, 08:59

Off-The-Chart wrote:does having bigger or smaller sigs really effect the number of posts per page?

yes, i wasnt very clear... adjust that to read:

number of viewable posts per page prior to having to scroll again...

scrolling through a picture galary to follow the point of a thread is counter-productive.... especially frustrating when the bulk of posts consist of more picture than post...

as aggressive as it sounds, a reduction would improve browsing, not through bandwidth usage, but common sense and readability...

rustypup · Post by **rustypup** » 24 Jan 2007, 09:02

kraven wrote:Will it de-value the boards in any way.

yes.

if it makes it more difficult to read a thread, it devalues the thread, and therefore the forums in general...

i'm not advocating removal, just constraint... this way the lolz0rs-crowd can continue with their inane interjections without too much thread-disruption...

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 24 Jan 2007, 09:05

yeah Rusty your points are well made...

though if you do not like the scrolling, why not turn the sigs off?

I also totally agree with you on that... I too do not like it to scroll down too much... but my liking to having a nice sig overcomes that...

all have valid points, and that is why I didn't say I demand it be enforced, after all that is why there are mods and admins...

kraven · Post by **kraven** » 24 Jan 2007, 09:05

ah, you are a no-nansy pansy type of guy, clearly. but for just the sake of pretty little pink butterflies, could you ever see an increase at least making the thread more pleasing to look at?

Off-The-Chart · Post by **Off-The-Chart** » 24 Jan 2007, 09:10

EDIT: nvm

rustypup · Post by **rustypup** » 24 Jan 2007, 09:17

kraven wrote:could you ever see an increase at least making the thread more pleasing to look at?

why would making a thread a work of art add anything of intellectual value to it?...

we have 'pic of the day', 'kitten', 'cute and cuddly' threads for this very reason... being subjected to it on every post is pointless..

it's like having a marketing blurb fired off after every paragraph in a conversation:

Barry-the-Sprout:"So, Bob was telling me you had a great idea on how to cut some of the fat off that quote?">>Keep your teeth shinier than ever with new LyeWyte©! It's the Tooth-whitiest!

Simon-the-Shaker:"Yes. I was going to suggest that..">>If it's a Boot, it's a Blackberry!

Simon-the-Shaker:"we offer them a chance to arrange their own..">>You will never need another tool again! The wizz-Bang-Ratchet-Hammer is the all purpose tool of the future! It even does the dishes!

get the picture?

PCFormat Forum Archive

Gfx appeal to admins... Pls...

Gfx appeal to admins... Pls...

Re: Gfx appeal to admins... Pls...