PLEASE READ - Permissable Signature Size in the Auran Trainz Forum
- Thread starter AJ_Fox
- Start date
- Status
Red_Rattler
Since 09 May 2003
Are the moderators taking action on oversize signatures?
Um 44smith, I thought this thread is suppose to be about singatures, not pictures! :hehe:
But seriously, let's see:
600 wide by 210 high = 177.78Kb (182,042 bytes)
44smith, I highly suspect that this was done on purpose AFTER a few members mentioned oversized signatures.
Sourdough, this is not about turning off signatures, as the member may have a good site, if it was a link.
EDIT: To the moderators, when are you going to take some sort of action on the signature picture in post 65 of this thread, as his signature as been that size for a while now?
Um 44smith, I thought this thread is suppose to be about singatures, not pictures! :hehe:
But seriously, let's see:
600 wide by 210 high = 177.78Kb (182,042 bytes)
44smith, I highly suspect that this was done on purpose AFTER a few members mentioned oversized signatures.
Sourdough, this is not about turning off signatures, as the member may have a good site, if it was a link.
EDIT: To the moderators, when are you going to take some sort of action on the signature picture in post 65 of this thread, as his signature as been that size for a while now?
Last edited:
Correct...my reply wasn't about turning off sigs (except for me)...it was about people who are obsessed about oversized sigs....if you report them, then you've done your civic duty....they are in the minority...losing sleep over it is a waste of time...
Personally, I'm not bothered about the size of peoples banners (they can over-compensate as much as they want :hehe: ), but some people do not have access to broadband, some of those that do have limits on the amount of data they can download per month.
I have an 8meg line with unlimited downloads (no really, I've tried it!), and living less than 2 miles away from the BT exchange, I get virtually no loss of bandwidth on my speeds, but others don't have that luxury.
My main gripe is the lack of enforcement of this rule.
Are we to decide for ourselves which COC rules we are to take seriously, and which to ignore?
If someone decided to start abusing people in a thread, effing and jeffing all over the place, would Auran or the mods be happy to let it go?
If the answer to that one is no, then they are being hypocritical, and should either enforce the rule that they made, scrap it altogether, or adjust it to something like 250k and 800x800 so it's not an issue any more.
It's because they do none of these things that people are assuming that they're not bothered any more.
I'm not convinced that the mods read threads any more.
It's almost tempting to make an over-sized banner for my posts, to see whether or not it's certain people that can't have them, rather than everyone.
Hmm.
Smiley.
I have an 8meg line with unlimited downloads (no really, I've tried it!), and living less than 2 miles away from the BT exchange, I get virtually no loss of bandwidth on my speeds, but others don't have that luxury.
My main gripe is the lack of enforcement of this rule.
Are we to decide for ourselves which COC rules we are to take seriously, and which to ignore?
If someone decided to start abusing people in a thread, effing and jeffing all over the place, would Auran or the mods be happy to let it go?
If the answer to that one is no, then they are being hypocritical, and should either enforce the rule that they made, scrap it altogether, or adjust it to something like 250k and 800x800 so it's not an issue any more.
It's because they do none of these things that people are assuming that they're not bothered any more.
I'm not convinced that the mods read threads any more.
It's almost tempting to make an over-sized banner for my posts, to see whether or not it's certain people that can't have them, rather than everyone.
Hmm.
Smiley.
Last edited:
Red_Rattler
Since 09 May 2003
That IS my point exactly!
Previous past actions by Auran answers that question.
Even I don't agree with oversize signatures, but Ditto.
And to those that have HAD a warning in the past for oversized signatures, should now go to the modarators and/or administrators and demand to have their warning abolished, as why should some get a warning for oversize signatures and be told to reduce it, while it seems others don't?
Last edited:
I have much respect for you Smiley, I will simply say that, Yes some laws are more important than others, in life and online.
I used to be on dial up so I know what it is like to wait for webpages to download, but how can I expect the rest of the Community to curb there experience for me?
Besides those on dial up are more likely to have bigger download limits than us broadband users. (present company excluded)
Regards
Red_Rattler
Since 09 May 2003
I private messaged a moderator, about a way oversized signature(s) last night, yet nothing has been done as of yet, but interestingly this moderator's last visit to the forums was AFTER my private message.
If you're talking about me, I did remove my sig.
Red_Rattler
Since 09 May 2003
Help on oversize signatures
For those that don't deliberately oversize their signatures, you can preview your signature beforehand. Just right-click and see both the dimension and size, along with other options to check the size before it is uploaded.
For those that don't deliberately oversize their signatures, you can preview your signature beforehand. Just right-click and see both the dimension and size, along with other options to check the size before it is uploaded.
- Status