Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ghporter · Nov 6, 2006, 08:12 PM

I was asked by a user this evening why we have a rule limiting signature pictures to 200 pixels by 50 pixels. The reason is that some forums have far more page space taken up by signatures than by content, and that stuff eats bandwidth like cheap popcorn. So for everyone's edification, I went out and did some research-I have not found a reallly good "bad" forum to post a link to, but I found a pretty good one.

So behold, The Digital Digest's Digital Video forum. Note the mod named blutach-his sig takes up almost my whole MBP screen, it moves, it's full of distracting colors and it's just plain ugly.

'Nuf said?

I should also point out that Digital Digest uses the same forum software we do...

I'll post more such unpleasantness as I come across it. Like The Ugo Player Forum!

C.A.T.S. CEO · Nov 6, 2006, 08:16 PM

link don't work

ghporter · Nov 6, 2006, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by C.A.T.S. CEO

link don't work

Fixed it-and added another one.

C.A.T.S. CEO · Nov 6, 2006, 08:22 PM

holy shiz-nit! That dude at the digital forum sig takes up ALL of my MacBooks screen!

slpdLoad · Nov 6, 2006, 08:25 PM

Yes, 'nuff said. I whole-hearteldy agree. The worst forums are the ones where I have to take a minute to distinguish where the post ends and the signature begins.

imitchellg5 · Nov 6, 2006, 08:26 PM

Wow. I almost had a heart attack! I have never complained about sigs here.

ghporter · Nov 6, 2006, 08:38 PM

My wife pointed out Cruise Critic to me. Behold! And again, this is vBulletin as bad as it can be! Yikes! How my wife finds useful information about cruises I do not know.

SSharon · Nov 6, 2006, 08:44 PM

ghporter: I don't remember which forum it was in but there was a post in the lounge not too long ago that linked to it and I remember that my only response was about the distracting sigs they had.

Long live 200x50!

edit: http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...aning-of-pwnt/

Doofy · Nov 6, 2006, 08:49 PM

Meh. Meh meh meh meh meh.

Oh, and meh.

Give a billion monkeys a typewriter...

C.A.T.S. CEO · Nov 6, 2006, 08:49 PM

wow...

Kevin · Nov 6, 2006, 09:08 PM

Harmony Central User Forums

Those sigs are horrible. I have em on ignore.

MRTrauffer · Nov 6, 2006, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by SSharon

ghporter: I don't remember which forum it was in but there was a post in the lounge not too long ago that linked to it and I remember that my only response was about the distracting sigs they had.

Long live 200x50!

edit: http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...aning-of-pwnt/

That forum was the first thing to come to my mind. The link to it is in this thread.

Gossamer · Nov 6, 2006, 10:01 PM

I am a fan of this forums's sig and avatar policies. No need for 640x480 sigs, plus the smaller sig sizes force some creativity.

Kevin · Nov 6, 2006, 11:23 PM

I say we go to 210x60

Gossamer · Nov 6, 2006, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I say we go to 210x60

One of my sigs was 201x51 for a while. It gave me such a rush.

Doofy · Nov 6, 2006, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

One of my sigs was 201x51 for a while.

Kill him!

/Caesar

Andy8 · Nov 7, 2006, 02:14 AM

I like to post bareback

~sans sig

Kevin · Nov 7, 2006, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

One of my sigs was 201x51 for a while. It gave me such a rush.

That's ok, back in 2001 I had an animated sig for 4 months.

ghporter · Nov 7, 2006, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by SSharon

ghporter: I don't remember which forum it was in but there was a post in the lounge not too long ago that linked to it and I remember that my only response was about the distracting sigs they had.

Long live 200x50!

edit: http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lou...aning-of-pwnt/

Yeah, those sigs are pretty distracting. At least they aren't moving!

SirCastor · Nov 7, 2006, 09:12 AM

I don't mind the restrictions at all. I've seen massive images in sigs. The image always dwarfs the post. It's ridiculous. Thanks for being wise about this.

Jawbone54 · Nov 7, 2006, 09:21 AM

I'm completely in favor of the sig restrictions. It makes the threads look much cleaner than most. 200x50 is enough to give that personal touch without being ridiculously distracting.

Dark Helmet · Nov 7, 2006, 11:10 AM

I think the restrictions are good but I still wish we could animate them as long as they stayed under a certain size.

wallinbl · Nov 7, 2006, 11:20 AM

I forgot that this board had signatures. I turned them off long ago due to all the OMGWTFBBQ crap and haven't thought about them since.

Doofy · Nov 7, 2006, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

I think the restrictions are good but I still wish we could animate them as long as they stayed under a certain size.

No! That way madness* lies.

(* and epileptic seizures)

Dark Helmet · Nov 7, 2006, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

No! That way madness* lies.

(* and epileptic seizures)

MacNN has had those strobing banner ads here for 6 months and I have pointed it out several times and they don't do anything about it.

If we can live through every colour in the rainbow flashing "YOU'VE WON" I think we can handle a little animated signature.

Doofy · Nov 7, 2006, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

If we can live through every colour in the rainbow flashing "YOU'VE WON" I think we can handle a little animated signature.

Yeah, but it won't be a little animated signature - it'll be many little animated signatures.

Dakar² · Nov 7, 2006, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Yeah, but it won't be a little animated signature - it'll be many little animated signatures.

An animated signature army!

Demonhood · Nov 7, 2006, 11:59 AM

having animated ads at known locations (the top and bottom of the page) is completely different than an army of animated signatures assaulting your senses and taking away from post content.

Rumor · Nov 7, 2006, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Harmony Central User Forums

Those sigs are horrible. I have em on ignore.

Dude, that board is full of convicts! Harmony Central User Forums - Womens toes are gorgeous

Dakar² · Nov 7, 2006, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by Demonhood

...post content.

A joke!

Kr0nos · Nov 7, 2006, 02:08 PM

I think the sig guidlines are a good thing, but avatars would be nice as well. Maybe limited to 150x150.

rickey939 · Nov 7, 2006, 02:30 PM

Sigs are overrated.

Rumor · Nov 7, 2006, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

I think the sig guidlines are a good thing, but avatars would be nice as well. Maybe limited to 150x150.

Avatar's would be nice if regulated. Perhaps an either/or could work.

Gossamer · Nov 7, 2006, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by Rumor

Avatar's would be nice if regulated. Perhaps an either/or could work.

The problem is an avatar can only be pictures, while a sig can only be text. So the people that want text would be miffed by the banning of signatures. Plus a 150x150 avatar makes the post 100 or so pixels longer than a standard signature, making the side of a post much longer than the post itself, which is why we have sig guidelines anyway. I like no avatars.

Railroader · Nov 7, 2006, 02:55 PM

Here's a place with sig rules more conservative than MacNN.

royalty free stock photography community | iStockphoto.com

But they do allow animated images.

Rumor · Nov 7, 2006, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

The problem is an avatar can only be pictures, while a sig can only be text. So the people that want text would be miffed by the banning of signatures. Plus a 150x150 avatar makes the post 100 or so pixels longer than a standard signature, making the side of a post much longer than the post itself, which is why we have sig guidelines anyway. I like no avatars.

I don't think you understand what I meant.

The choice would be a sig or an avatar. An avatar wouldn't allow text, but a sig would have the same guidelines that it currently has.

Dark Helmet · Nov 7, 2006, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by Demonhood

having animated ads at known locations (the top and bottom of the page) is completely different than an army of animated signatures assaulting your senses and taking away from post content.

Can you explain how 6 different colours all strobing individually in the span on half a second adds to my posting experience?

Gossamer · Nov 7, 2006, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by Rumor

I don't think you understand what I meant.

The choice would be a sig or an avatar. An avatar wouldn't allow text, but a sig would have the same guidelines that it currently has.

Gotcha. But that still would allow the left bar to be longer than a post. As it is right now, a one line reply coupled with a 50px sig and one line of text lines up perfectly with the text (post count, location, etc) on the left bar. But adding 150px to the height of that left bar would be a waste of space, IMO.

Gossamer · Nov 7, 2006, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Can you explain how 6 different colours all strobing individually in the span on half a second adds to my posting experience?

What ads?
(Link)

Rumor · Nov 7, 2006, 03:05 PM

floppymoose sounds so.....perverted

Doofy · Nov 7, 2006, 03:06 PM

MacNN Forum Sig Rules: It ain't broke, so don't fix it.

davesimondotcom · Nov 7, 2006, 03:09 PM

Another forum I'm a member of doesn't have regulations on sig size and it definitely makes the board a lot slower.

Besides, 200x50 forces creativity in a small space. I like it.

voodoo · Nov 7, 2006, 03:28 PM

I still have a sig by the old sig guidlines.

I'm retro.

V

Salty · Nov 7, 2006, 04:03 PM

I've complained about the sig sizes but just because we do have a LOT of vertical space and tons of horizontal space. And 50 pixels really isn't that big. I don't want insane limits like 300 pixels high, but if we could do as bit as 400/100 (100 high) I think we'd still be doing fine. And considering the people that we do have here you're not likely to get insane animated gifs and stuff like that. And often we have really short posts where the side column info takes up more room than the height of the post.
When I admined a forum I kept the limit at 200/500, because then you could at most be taking up the width of a 640/480 screen. There really doesn't seem to be terribly good reason for limiting the width of sigs as low as 200.

Demonhood · Nov 7, 2006, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Can you explain how 6 different colours all strobing individually in the span on half a second adds to my posting experience?

the crazy annoying ads are generally removed fairly promptly. sometimes the company that feeds us the ads puts them back in without our permission.

and really, you can always scroll down a thread so you're not looking at a simple animated ad while you're reading a thread.

hey!_Zeus · Nov 7, 2006, 04:58 PM

Other than the sigs...The Digital Digest's Digital Video forum has a nice layout.

As far as sig size goes, smaller makes you more creative.

Ahhh...maybe not mine tho.

davesimondotcom · Nov 7, 2006, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

I still have a sig by the old sig guidlines.

I'm retro.

V

Me too.

ghporter · Nov 7, 2006, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Here's a place with sig rules more conservative than MacNN.

royalty free stock photography community | iStockphoto.com

But they do allow animated images.

That one is so sparse that I have to look hard to see where each post starts and stops. I think it's TOO sparse. Unless you look at it from a design view - it's pretty, sort of ethereal and cloud-like - it's hard to read.

Railroader · Nov 7, 2006, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

That one is so sparse that I have to look hard to see where each post starts and stops. I think it's TOO sparse. Unless you look at it from a design view - it's pretty, sort of ethereal and cloud-like - it's hard to read.

The framing on MacNN helps with that. If they added the frames it would be easier to differentiate individual posts.

itai195 · Nov 8, 2006, 12:59 AM

As far as huge annoying sigs go, howard forums is the worst I've seen. Some video game places are pretty bad too.

That said, I would like to see the sig rules here loosened just a bit... There are some cool Xbox Live gamertag generators that make images just barely too large...