signature question

[Puma]

Nothing worse then hitting reply and having to wait for two minuites before I can so my color and font changes.

Now there being a way to set those as permanent for what you want. THAT would be awesome.

That would be sweet! or savory even.

[dingo]

For what little it is worth, I prefer no images in sigs. Keeps everything clean.

So if it turns out that you are going to add them, can you make it possible to disable just the images in sigs, not the entire sigs.

[howyadoin]

For what little it is worth, I prefer no images in sigs. Keeps everything clean.

So if it turns out that you are going to add them, can you make it possible to disable just the images in sigs, not the entire sigs.

I'm in the same boat. I think it's possible that people would use signature images that look good, but not likely.

[Maija]

I'm quite happy with no images in sigs. If people are given that option, some are going to inevitably use animated gifs and when they post repeatedly in one thread it'll be seizure-inducing.

The banner ads are bad enough (man I can't wait for Southland Tales to come out so that I don't have to see the banner any more).

[Matt]

We have the ability to turn off animated gifs as signature images.

[Faded]

If we get image sigs I would be overcome with GLEE.

There's usually an option to not view signatures in the User CP anyway for those who think its too flashy, right?

[Gladiaria_Alata]

I'll consider it, but it's not likely.

One of the things we here at CBR like about our forums is how clean they are. Some forums that allow giant sized avatars and images of whatever size in the signature just become impossible to read. So much flashing stuff and junk taking up page space unnecessarily. It can be really distracting and hurt the browsing experience.

That said, I know that folks have been asking about signature images for a long time, so we're experimenting with it. There will be size limits -- both file size and dimensions -- so that it's not abused and, if implemented, there will likely be some image guidelines to reduce the chances for it getting out of hand.

Not even 90x90 pixels, like the profile pics?

[Matt Algren]

If we get image sigs I would be overcome with GLEE.

There's usually an option to not view signatures in the User CP anyway for those who think its too flashy, right?

You have the option to turn signatures off, but I don't want signatures off. I want signature images off.

Let's just be honest with ourselves; within an hour of word getting out that they're turned on (if they get turned on), they're'll be a crapload posters with tits and asses in their signatures.

[Faded]

You have the option to turn signatures off, but I don't want signatures off. I want signature images off.

Let's just be honest with ourselves; within an hour of word getting out that they're turned on (if they get turned on), they're'll be a crapload posters with tits and asses in their signatures.

There'll probably be as many signatures with tits and asses as there are avatars of them.

[Pwood]

You have the option to turn signatures off, but I don't want signatures off. I want signature images off.

Ex-act-ly. Still want sigs, just no images. So, it would be nice to have an option like that...

[Brad Barton]

How about instead of enabling/not enabling the function to the entire board, just have it so you can PM a SuperMod/Admin and ask for express permission to have the function turned on?

In this PM, you could also submit the image you wish to use for Mod approval, which would put to rest the excessive T&A worries.

[Matt]

Such options are on a usergroup basis, not individual user.
And, to be blunt, I have far better things to do than go through individual user requests such as those.

And yes, it would take an admin to make such changes.

[Brad Barton]

Such options are on a usergroup basis, not individual user.
And, to be blunt, I have far better things to do than go through individual user requests such as those.

And yes, it would take an admin to make such changes.

Well, the general consensus from both posters and Mods seems to be "No", so why continue with the "experiment"?

Just curious.

[mattbib]

Well, the general consensus from both posters and Mods seems to be "No", so why continue with the "experiment"?

Just curious.

To solicit additional feedback, possibly? We're not exactly in a rush to make any decisions.