Why do people need an aviator and a picture signature..?
They seem to be getting bigger and bigger, and it drives me mad. :evil:
Quote from: JohnnyFindWhy do people need an aviator and a picture signature..?
They seem to be getting bigger and bigger, and it drives me mad. :evil:
I'd agree there, I personally would ban pictures in sigs.
Now I`ve completed my regular eight hours moaning at work, I`ve come home and need to do some more........the avatars seem OK, but the sigs are now getting bigger than the actual message...and usually they`re not as interesting :wink:
Then again I am a luddite and sigs don`t interest me.
You lot are only moaning cause you ain't got one !!!! :lol: :wink: :lol:
What about the feedom of choice? :?
They are hosted on web space elsewhere!!!
And before you moan about those using 56k, the text comes up before the pictures !!!! :lol:
QuoteWhat about the feedom of choice?
What about it? :wink: I see no written and signed contract entitling anyone to that.
Seriously though, the sigs do break the flow of the threads and make them harder to read. Now, of course, the perception of how hard something is to read is up to the individual. In my case I 'scan read' and don't bother reading anything that looks uninteresting. I sometimes skip over some of the more artistically stunning threads due to the act that they often contain more graphics than words and I don't have time / can't be bothered to read them.
A good example of a site that is very easy to read are the forums at //www.webmasterworld.com. They don't allow sigs because of the readability issue - and it makes a huge difference. Now that site is a serious discussion site where mixing huge graphics with long threads of debate would make things very difficult. We on the other hand need a more balanced approach but IMHO the sigs are getting too big at the moment and the admins need to decide what approach to take to the problem.
Quote from: UndergridQuote from: JohnnyFindWhy do people need an aviator and a picture signature..?
They seem to be getting bigger and bigger, and it drives me mad. :evil:
I'd agree there, I personally would ban pictures in sigs.
sigs are a way of being a bit differant,in a clan you all have same tag name-etc,so sigs are a way of saying that this little bit of art work is yours and yours alone,now i dont see a problem with these-BUT we are all allowed our own views but what i dont agree with is the DONT CLICK HERE bit up above,and thats an admin of hamster for you,sorry guys but come on ,harmless sig against that...well.....what can we say.. :wink:
Quote from: phil-007-uk
sigs are a way of being a bit differant,in a clan you all have same tag name-etc,so sigs are a way of saying that this little bit of art work is yours and yours alone,now i dont see a problem with these-BUT we are all allowed our own views but what i dont agree with is the DONT CLICK HERE bit up above,and thats an admin of hamster for you,sorry guys but come on ,harmless sig against that...well.....what can we say.. :wink:
I have nothing against sigs, what I have a problem with is bloomin big pictures in every message. If I didn't like sig then they would be disabled on this board (which can be done very easily) which they may notice that they are not.
Now as for my sig, if you click a link that tells you not to then thats your own business..
I'm not a fan of banner sigs, I must say. They do become intrusive, especially when someone has made several posts in a thread, meaning their large sig repeats over and over again on the same page (grrr!) :x
I have a piccy in my sig, but it's only really a text string that I can't get unless I use a piccy... it is pretty small and unobtrusive. But that's because it's an actual signature, not a full movie poster campaign! 8) :lol:
Steve :D :D
Quote from: Flt Lt Bradshaw (now Calibrax :D)I'm not a fan of banner sigs, I must say. They do become intrusive, especially when someone has made several posts in a thread, meaning their large sig repeats over and over again on the same page (grrr!) :x
However u do have an avatar which is 115k........ now how long would that take u 2 download over 56k?? Thats not the issue though is it?? The issue is about physical size rather than file size...... personally i like seeing the expressions of artwork, and once they have been downloaded once they stay in the cache and load instantly the page does......
Guys, if my signature offends then it shall be removed, but that has been my sig ever since my name became Wolverine back in the days when i was running MCM2 every hour god sent and then a few more....... Lemme know and i shall remove it if required...
L8s
Chris
Quote from: WolverineHowever u do have an avatar which is 115k........ now how long would that take u 2 download over 56k?? Thats not the issue though is it?? The issue is about physical size rather than file size...... personally i like seeing the expressions of artwork, and once they have been downloaded once they stay in the cache and load instantly the page does......
To download 115k over a 56k connection would take 16 seconds (download time calculator here (http://www.kolias.com/computers/downloadtime.htm)!). I know, my avatar is bigger than it should be, but then my sig is quite a bit smaller than I
could make it... :twisted: :lol:
Anyway as you said, size isn't the issue - text displays on screen before the avatars / sigs download, so really the connection speed is irrelevant. 8)
I like the artwork too... but to see it seven or eight times on a single page gets irritating after a while! Your sig is rather nice though.
Steve :D :D
PS... I just optimised my avatar, so it's now 79kb, not 115kb... been meaning to do it for a while, just hadn't got round to it. :D
hope hamsters dont ban sigs,some are very good,some arnt,but its just that little thing to say im differant. :wink: hope this isnt going to be a tit 4 tat post.we are all allowed our say i agree.but i hope it does nt go to far ,to the extent that all sigs get banned...would be a shame,cos you have to admit-they do brighten things up-and some are really funny.and make you laugh
Quote from: phil-007-ukhope hamsters dont ban sigs
Naah, I don't think they should be banned, I mean, sigs are standard on forums across the web... I'm not a huge fan of them myself, but everyone has the right to express themselves with a sig if they want. Personally I prefer to express myself with my avatar, but that's just the way I am (slightly odd!) :wink:
Steve :D :D
Quotesigs are standard on forums across the web
I'm sorry but that isn't true. They are allowed on some forums and banned on others. It depends on the forum.
Quotebut everyone has the right to express themselves with a sig if they want.
That isn't true either. Everyone is allowed to use the forums within the rules. If the rules of the forums were to change so that sigs weren't allowed then that is that. I don't recall sigs being mentioned in the Human Rights Act. :wink:
When I first came to {HamsteR} they people here only used avators.
Think I was the first to use a sig as well (might be wrong about that) :oops:
So if people don't like sigs, blaim me :twisted: :wink:
QuoteSo if people don't like sigs, blaim me
It's you! You created the monster! Everyone get 'im! :wink:
While I was in the shower this morning I had an idea which came about whilst I was considering why sigs were intrusive. I came to the conclusion that the amount of perceived intrusion depends upon the type of thread. Sigs will probably be unobtrusive in a chatty thread but very annoying in a thread like a Match signup where you want to quickly see who is interested in playing. If this is technically possible (and it would probably require some work) maybe sigs should be removed (using code) in certain forums (e.g. Hamster news, Hamster 1 subs?) but left to remain in others (free chat, Lobby, ROW public forum?). That would be a good compromise if it worked.
As I see it people are allowed to choose and host their own aviator (sic.) and the rules on the size of this are very relaxed, other than the overall dimensions, and this really should serve the same purpose as an image in a sig. I agree with the previous poster images in sigs break up the flow.
Scoob, consider yourself blamed :D
Quote from: TrickyI came to the conclusion that the amount of perceived intrusion depends upon the type of thread. Sigs will probably be unobtrusive in a chatty thread but very annoying in a thread like a Match signup where you want to quickly see who is interested in playing. If this is technically possible (and it would probably require some work) maybe sigs should be removed (using code) in certain forums (e.g. Hamster news, Hamster 1 subs?) but left to remain in others (free chat, Lobby, ROW public forum?). That would be a good compromise if it worked.
I've seen this before with the clan I was in with Deltaforce.
It works good, afterall, we know the sigs from the members already
i seem to remember we used to use them long ago (i remember LOT having a gun or something in a sig image) but we decided it was easier to read everything without one.
personally, i don't care for them - they can end up dominating the thread.
don't forget: content is god 8)
I dont like sigs, there bad for you!
Make your breath smell and cost to much...
He he,,,,,, 2toes "lightening up the load"
Quote from: TrickyQuotesigs are standard on forums across the web
I'm sorry but that isn't true. They are allowed on some forums and banned on others. It depends on the forum.
They ARE standard, in so as far as the feature available as standard with most of the forums out there. Some forums may not use the feature, but that's their choice. I couldn't care either way to be honest... the content of the forum is
much more important. And we have one of the best in that regard (well, except for the constant spamming every time we reach a post count ending in 00.... :D )
Quote from: TrickyQuotebut everyone has the right to express themselves with a sig if they want.
That isn't true either. Everyone is allowed to use the forums within the rules. If the rules of the forums were to change so that sigs weren't allowed then that is that. I don't recall sigs being mentioned in the Human Rights Act. :wink:
Human rights?? naah, this is about {HamsteR} rights, surely!! :wink: Everyone DOES have the right to express themselves with a sig... sigs are allowed at the moment, and even if they weren't then people STILL have the right to express themselves with a sig... just not on www.hamsterserver.com! :D
Anyway, sigs are bad for your health... I heard someone say the other day that sigs cause lung cancer... :wink: :lol:
Steve :D :D
QuoteThey ARE standard, in so as far as the feature available as standard with most of the forums out there. Some forums may not use the feature, but that's their choice.
Well I think that a bit like calling a sun roof on a car standard just because a lot of cars have them. A lot of cars have them as standard but I wouldn't say that it's a standard feature for the generic car - not like wheels, etc. Still, I see where you are coming from, and like you say, it's the content that's important and in this case the question of whether the sigs are detracting from the content or not.
Quote(well, except for the constant spamming every time we reach a post count ending in 00.... )
Er, well the admins started that when we were approaching 100 posts so you can blame us. In fact, blame Spikey 'cos he probably started it :wink: .
QuoteEveryone DOES have the right to express themselves with a sig... sigs are allowed at the moment
OK, so your definition of 'right' is different to mine. I would say that a right is something that is enshrined in either law, or the rules and regulations of a governing body - and I tend to think of rights as something pretty important rather than minor side issues. E.g. the right to have an opinion - major issue. The right to have a sig - minor issue. Even if it was explicitly written in Hamsterserver rules that sigs were allowed, I would still hold the opinion that it is something that is allowed rather than a 'right'.
As a side note here - the reason I am banging on about this is firstly because you seem to like a good debate and I do too so that's great! But secondly, we have had a few members of the public come here in the past who bluntly
demand things from us (e.g. access to maps, access to the servers etc). They act as though they have a right to these services. Of course they don't have the right to do so, but we do allow the public to play on our servers and use our facilities. If we want to stop certain people playing then we can (within Barrysworld T&C's). If they had a right to it then we couldn't do that. That is how I see the distinction.
QuoteAnyway, sigs are bad for your health... I heard someone say the other day that sigs cause lung cancer...
I heard that sigs are addictive, make you spend your whole life on them, and make you spend all your money on them. Or is that online games? Or maybe the wife... :D
QuoteEr, well the admins started that when we were approaching 100 posts so you can blame us. In fact, blame Spikey 'cos he probably started it
Ahum - you can blame skid for starting that (http://www.hamsterserver.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=589) :wink:
Quote from: TrickyOK, so your definition of 'right' is different to mine. I would say that a right is something that is enshrined in either law, or the rules and regulations of a governing body - and I tend to think of rights as something pretty important rather than minor side issues. - snip-
Yeah, I see where you're coming from, it makes good sense... defining it like that just never occurred to me. I was seeing it more in black & white, I guess. :black:
Quote from: TrickyAs a side note here - the reason I am banging on about this is firstly because you seem to like a good debate and I do too so that's great!
Debate is great... I love it. Makes for good forum reading too! 8)
Quote from: TrickyI heard that sigs are addictive, make you spend your whole life on them, and make you spend all your money on them. Or is that online games? Or maybe the wife... :D
It's definitely online games. They are the main reason I upgraded my PC from a lowly (but heavily upgraded) P233 to a P4 2GHz at the start of the year. ÃÆ'ââ,¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ,£1400 well spent, I think! 8O
Steve :D :D