User base poll: Signature images or no?

**Matt** · 11-24-2007, 12:58 AM

For a time now, the Moderators have been experimenting with forum options relating to the use of images in signatures.

We've taken quite a few comments from users and moderators alike about this matter and experiments continue.

Please fill in the poll in this thread with your opinion on this matter. Please note, this poll will not dictate forum policy in any way. Instead, it is to serve as a gauge of feeling amongst server members. The final call will be up to the Moderators, Super Mods and Administrators (and finally, the Boss Man Jonah!).

Cheers!

**rick** · 11-24-2007, 01:32 AM

I don't even know if I would do anything in my signature, but if the server could handle it, I would love to have the option.

**Chris N** · 11-24-2007, 02:20 AM

It was stated in the other thread by some, but to add my vote to the matter:

I like seeing people's signatures. I don't really want to see images in them. But if people want to see/display images, more power to them. I do however want to see images in posts, as they're relevant and not images I have to see over and over again.

So could the "no image in sigs" option be added to my own display options if images in sigs are allowed.

If not, then my favourite option is obviously "only for moderators and CotM members".

**GozertheGozarian** · 11-24-2007, 02:50 AM

I'm on another board that has images in signatures and find it annoying and a waste of space.

**Mormel** · 11-24-2007, 07:12 AM

I share Chris Nowlin's opinion on this. I like signatures, but I wouldn't like to see images in them. I dislike them on other message boards that use pics in sigs.

I voted 'I prefer not, but don't really care' although I am slightly leaning toward the 'No. Only text, no images'. But if other users want to have images in their sigs, I'm cool with that. I'd settle for turning off the signatures in my options, but the option to not display the signature images would be nice. :)

**Pwood** · 11-24-2007, 11:21 AM

I voted that there should be images in sigs, but just so long as they are not animated (people getting crazy with the cheese whiz) and we have an options to turn the image part of the signature off. I think that if people want them, sure why not. Just allow those of us who don't want to see the images there an option for them to be turned off...

I still like the text, so I'd like to see that. And I don't care if people have images, just so long as all of us don't have to see them...

**Deathstroke** · 11-25-2007, 10:11 AM

Text like we have now, but no images.

**Ghost** · 11-25-2007, 10:49 AM

I say no. Sigged images tend to get annoying really fast. (Especially the large kind that take up more space then your average post.) I'd rather we have non of that around here.

**Matt** · 11-25-2007, 11:52 AM

For information purposes, I'd like to point out that my current test sig image is as big as we'd ever allow if this went ahead.

**Chris N** · 11-25-2007, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by Matt

For information purposes, I'd like to point out that my current test sig image is as big as we'd ever allow if this went ahead.

That certainly helps, as long as you're talking about all dimensions.

The height of your image is a huge part of what makes it nonintrusive. (That's not a word, is it?)

The fact that it's cool certainly helps.

**Guapo Méndez** · 11-26-2007, 10:57 AM

I only have one image in my signature in another board.

That's as far as I'd go regarding signatures.

**DonC** · 11-29-2007, 03:43 PM

As long as I can turn them off, go wild. However, if you do go with them, you should limit the size. Hell, you should already be limiting the size of signatures.

**Matt Algren** · 11-29-2007, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by DonC

As long as I can turn them off, go wild. However, if you do go with them, you should limit the size. Hell, you should already be limiting the size of signatures.

They do. It's a 500 character limit. No limit on height, unfortunately. (See two posts up.)