Shoutbox

I wouldnt mind the extra pixels in height...

56kers? they still exist?

Why does it need to be bigger? Its bad enough already, that when I go to forums and try to read through the post, only to find that every post has a signature attached, which is 2-5 times larger than the post....

What's wrong with 125px? Are people who make signatures too lazy to set the canvas size in Photoshop (or w/e u use) to 125px heigh? Its not hard...

I want to read the posts, not spend half an hour loading, and browsing through signatures....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourjays
I want to read the posts, not spend half an hour loading, and browsing through signatures....

---

1. HTML loads before images, and in proper browsers it should show before.

2. Signatures are usually cached.

3.It's as difficult to set canvas to 125px as to 150px, so please leave stupid arguments out.

4. I'm just asking for a 20% more, not dozens of times higher. Even I'm suggesting a way so that the post size does not increase, so you are seing the same space anyway. And yes, there's also some 'air' in between.

5. Actually if you yourself, Fourjays, post only one line, your signature will be 5 times higher than your post. And still, your postbit will be higher than the whole other.

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourjays
I want to read the posts, not spend half an hour loading, and browsing through signatures....

---

1. HTML loads before images, and in proper browsers it should show before.

2. Signatures are usually cached.

3.It's as difficult to set canvas to 125px as to 150px, so please leave stupid arguments out.

4. I'm just asking for a 20% more, not dozens of times higher. Even I'm suggesting a way so that the post size does not increase, so you are seing the same space anyway. And yes, there's also some 'air' in between.

5. Actually if you yourself, Fourjays, post only one line, your signature will be 5 times higher than your post. And still, your postbit will be higher than the whole other.

---

@1. Yes, but doesn't make much difference. The page continues to load the images, which, when there are a page of, takes a while (even longer if they are on random scripts, until all images on the script are cached). Yes the HTML laods first, so yes the text becomes visible, prior to the images. But you can't actually read the posts until the images are all loaded, because otherwise the page jumps up/down as it loads them.

@3. I wasn't pointing it out like that. Several people have said along the lines of "it crops my signature images". Why the hell don't they just make it 125px in the first place and be done with it? Why does the size need increasing because of those who can't manage to change the size of their signature. Isn't it a challenge to make a signature with everything you want, but within a specific space?

@5. Now your putting stupid arguments in. I have visted many forums, and quite a few have ridiculous signatures. Someone writes a ten line post, which is followed by a page long signature...
If it is increased, whats to say someone will come on in 3 months time, and demand that it is increased by an additional 20%. Then 3 months after that, another 20%... Before you know it the signatures will be 3000px x 10000px!

Why does it need increasing anyway? One, good, solid reason why they need to be bigger? Shouldn't we be concentrating on reading the posts, and not looking at signatures? (tbh, some of the best forums I have ever been on, are stripped to the bare basics)?

I've presented a way it does not impact thread's view (heck it will even save space!). It seems you didn't read the reasons on the first post and why I didn't request 200 or 300 pixels straight along.

Thanks

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourjays
What's wrong with 125px? Are people who make signatures too lazy to set the canvas size in Photoshop (or w/e u use) to 125px heigh? Its not hard...

---

Read his post before you go attacking like that.

He is not asking for a increase in signature sizes, he is asking for the REAL size to be implemented, 150x in heighth (sp?). ATM the limit is 125px in height because of the IP Address: logged line.

I totally agree with the fact that we should not see the ip logged thing because it is no use to us. However comes the problems for admins. They will see no change, and will therefore not want to change something they won't even be able to test out themselves

quote:

---

Originally posted by XxRebelSeanxX
He is not asking for a increase in signature sizes, he is asking for the REAL size to be implemented, 150x in heighth (sp?). ATM the limit is 125px in height because of the IP Address: logged line.

---

What? No, that's not correct.

The limit for signature height is 125px, not 150px. The IP Address text has no effect on the signature size limit. It is not inside the signature <div>. However, removing the IP text would save a bit of space, space that could be used to justify increasing the maximum signature height limit.

* Sigs are signatures!, not full blown art works and even not banners!. They can be "a piece of art" or they can contain a small banner, but the purpose of a sig is not to be highres "artwork" or a full blown site banner.
* Complaints about sig space are mostly done by people who don't seem to be able to put the text/art/whatver they want in a small size. Learn to be creative, use a decent graphic editors, use your imagination. 75% of all sigs I see can be made much smaller, yet containing all the visual elements as the original and be as good looking (or even better).
* People who say they need +200px height sigs need to learn how to create appealing graphics and need to learn what a sig is. Sorry to be so blunt, but this needs to be said.
* Large sigs can be (heck, they always are) very distracting, and a forum isn't an art gallery. The main purpose of a forum is to read posts, not to stare at massive sigs made in paintbrush and to scroll constantly to read 3 posts.
* Small sigs encourage creativity.
* Signatures become very overwhelming in comparison to post content if too big.
* In case of 1 line posts, it is a big no-no if sigs enlarge the total used space for a post even more. But this doesn't mean there is currently space available. True, if you use the maximum allowed avatar height, the userbit table is the biggest element. But as it is now, the total size of an average sig vs. the average userbit table is perfect.
* The empty space before/after a sig is very welcome, and as Gif83 has said, is very welcome for a "breather". Not everything needs to be crammed together.
* Many sigs are just 1 big word or couple of words. Why do they need to be so high???? We do can read normal print too, we are not blind.
* Why do you _have_ to use all the available space for a sig???
* Do people like bloating their sigs with information about themselves or homebrew creativity? Yes. But that doesn't mean limits should increase at all. It means those people need to learn how to be creative and even how to link to a page with their bloats if needed. Are such bloated big sigs usefull? Absolutely not and they even cause more aggrivation to the serious reader than causing "joy" to the "spammer".


------------------

examples:

MR_5_MR:
http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=50...d=530509#pid530509
You could easly make that sig 10 even 20px or more smaller and still have all the visual impact it has now. Even if you don't want to do that, the space between the topsticker and the logo can also be decreased.

mandorallen:
http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=50...d=530475#pid530475
No offense though, but your sig is a nice example of 1 word sigs, which could easly be made smaller. (So, I'm not saying yours is too big, cause it isn't, it's just a nice example of 1 word sigs)

John Anderton:
http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=50...d=530678#pid530678
Another example of 1 word sigs with a "lets make a massive size background just for the heck of it". This one will loose nothing of its appeal if it is even simply cropped by a few pixels. (Again, no offense, and yours isn't too big at all. It is just to show some complainers that you can crop down sigs without loosing anything.)

How bad it can get:
Look on mess.be. Without throwing mud to mess.be or the admins/mods, but the "sig policy" there is one of the reasons that mess.be is hard to read for a serious poster and the allowance of sig massive sigs just increases the feeling of "spamming" also. I don't have anything against such stuff on some forums, but is mess.be suppose to be a spam forum or a informative forum? Luckaly it has been approved a bit by the new policy, but still... What I mean is, on a forum which has no real purpose and is mostly used to chitchat, I don't have any problems with massive sigs or even spam for that matter, but not on forums which are suppose to be informative. If I want to chitchat/spam I don't care about massive sigs either, if I want to learn/research/whatever, I don't want a 500px height sig with no usefull info what-so-ever besides the user's name in big bold to stare at me.


------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lee Jeffery

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Anderton
"it'd be a pain to 56kers"

---

that just doesnt make any sense at all, as sigs that are too big are simply hidden but they still load :/

---

Sigs which are too big will not only be hidden by the CSS style, they will also be reported and removed, because of the filesize or because of their useless hieght.

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm
To why it should be increased: Most boards have 150+px height. If I create a sig for those, it will be a pain in the ass to specifically create one for these. As I said, I misleadedly thought this board allowed 150px height.

---

150+ is IMO also too big. Besides, that, as said, make your sig smaller to begin with so there aren't any problems. Why should a sig _need_ to be the maximum allowed size?

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm
If people don't want to see sigs because they have a low resolution or a slow connection, they can always disable them from the CP.

---

Why should those people be forced in removing (possible usefull) forum elements (this goes also for the argument of "disable sigs if you don't want to see them"? Besides that, what do you call a low resolution? 1024x786 is the most common used resolution. And even on that resolution, a 150px makes it that there is only space for 1 small post in the immediate view of your browser. Not to mention what happens when you have +150 sigs and/or a smaller resolution. A forum is a place where posts are the most important part, not sigs...

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm
1. HTML loads before images, and in proper browsers it should show before.

---

Even in proper browsers it will not show (decently) before the html. This is because a browser doesn't know how high and width the pic is going to be. Hence you see the page jumping around _and_ post anchors (which are a very important element in forums) don't work properly (because they are loaded before pictures because they are HTML) and the larger the pics are the less accurate the anchors become.

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm
2. Signatures are usually cached.

---

true and "solves" filesizes, but not the even more important readablility.

quote:

---

Originally posted by KeyStorm
4. I'm just asking for a 20% more, not dozens of times higher.

---

You ask for 20%, next month someone else ask for yet 10% more, etc...


------------------

Now to the original reason why this thread was made:

It is a good and nice idea to try to do something with unused space and solve the "cropped sig" problem. I'm all for it. But the space in front of a sig shouldn't be touched IMHO. As for regaining the space occupied by the "IP logged" message, I agree.

As for, while "fixing" that, increasing the sig space to 150px, I totally don't agree. Removing the IP isn't a reason to increase sig size at all IMO, and only justifies the actions of people who are too lazy (or incapable) to make some decent informative-forum-like sigs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
But the space in front of a sig shouldn't be touched IMHO

---

I don't really know if you mean above or below the sig...

Anyway, I could be quoting all the day but there's nothing else to say from my part, so well...

Hope that issue gets fixed and hope I lose some laziness in my life...

Oh, I forgot, 150px is what I personally think is an acceptable limit for any board. I wouldn't be asking for more, that's for sure. But anyway I thought it was 150 and after quite some time drawing the new sig I found out it wasn't.

What to do with my new sig now? Recycling, I suppose...