Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > Feedback > 200x50 vs. four lines of text

200x50 vs. four lines of text
Thread Tools
starman
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 12:07 PM
 
So, a few months back I asked for a 50 pixel extension on sigs. If anything, to line up with the top button items. Now I see sigs with text that are MASSIVE. Four lines, running from one end of the post to the other.

Can someone explain the logic here? Why is it I can't get a few extra pixels on a sig but people like Railroader can write a friggin' tome that takes up 8x as much actual space?

(note: this is not a rag on Railroader, this is just pointing out a flaw in the rules)

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
C.A.T.S. CEO
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 01:11 PM
 
I agree with expanding the max pixel length. I'm more worried about all of the sig violators going by the way side. Maybe 300x50 or 400x50?
Signature depreciated.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 01:17 PM
 
I'd like to see the sig guidelines restricted actually. 81 x 50 or one line of text.

And although you're offended by my sig starman, don't worry about it. It is only temporary. Just making a point (badly, as usual).
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 01:27 PM
 
Yeah, we certainly have the space for more width, but honestly, I don't see any nicer sigs coming out of extra width. Height on the other hand...
     
starman  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 01:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
I'd like to see the sig guidelines restricted actually. 81 x 50 or one line of text.

And although you're offended by my sig starman, don't worry about it. It is only temporary. Just making a point (badly, as usual).
I specifically said I wasn't offended by it.

I'm pointing out how the rules are silly.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
I specifically said I wasn't offended by it.

I'm pointing out how the rules are silly.
OK. Major coincidence then. People have been using 4+ line of text for years around here with mulit-colored text and moments after I change mine I get singled out to use as an excuse? I'll accept coincidence if you say so, but I'll admit I am a little skeptical.

The image and lines of text are not that silly. It's simple. The image rule is so people don't make highly annoying animated or outrageously sized images that are distracting or cause a scroll bar at the bottom of a browser window. The text automatically wraps and therefor doesn't affect window size, and four lines is roughly equal to 50 px tall as long as people don't resize the text beyond the default size.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:07 PM
 
A bit more width on the sig images would be pointless. You'd just get less décolletage.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:09 PM
 
it's true it's silly. FWIW Railroader's sig takes up 5 lines the way I have my window open. Not that it's his fault, but it's a bit much, I agree. I personally am for any solution which limits the amount of personal customization as these forums distinguish themselves already by being very easy on the eyes.

My solution would be to make text in sigs a soft grey ONLY. This way it doesn't jump out at you, though would still be readable should you feel so inclined.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
Yeah, we certainly have the space for more width, but honestly, I don't see any nicer sigs coming out of extra width. Height on the other hand...
Not much more height. That would add to the amount of scrolling.

but 120 x 75 would be nice (but without the one line of text.) Or just one line of text on a 1280 width screen.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by paul w View Post
it's true it's silly. FWIW Railroader's sig takes up 5 lines the way I have my window open. Not that it's his fault, but it's a bit much, I agree. I personally am for any solution which limits the amount of personal customization as these forums distinguish themselves already by being very easy on the eyes.

My solution would be to make text in sigs a soft grey ONLY. This way it doesn't jump out at you, though would still be readable should you feel so inclined.
How narrow do you have your browser window?!? 600 pixels?

How about a single color, not mixed color like I and others are currently using? Limit it to blue, black, or grey?
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:27 PM
 


And really, I find that text any color, including black, is distracting. Something softer than the rest of the text is all I'm suggesting.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
Not much more height. That would add to the amount of scrolling.
Yeah, i don't find scrolling to be so horrible. Especially with the take to unread posts button or page up/page down.

Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
but 120 x 75 would be nice (but without the one line of text.) Or just one line of text on a 1280 width screen.
Uh, why kill the width?
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
Yeah, i don't find scrolling to be so horrible. Especially with the take to unread posts button or page up/page down.
I don't know... some forums get a little crazy with their sig heights and it is annoying to scroll too much. I know I don't regularly frequent forums like that.
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
Uh, why kill the width?
To keep to the scale of the golden rectangle. Aesthetics mainly.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 02:39 PM
 
Well you can't take away width you've already given. That'd be like Apple taking away features when you upgrade the OS.

And the golden rectangle has been sucking MacNNs nut for so long any increase in height is going to be a major improvement.
Well at least 5-10 pixels.
     
Demonhood
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:05 PM
 
you just want more room for Bowie.
     
starman  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
OK. Major coincidence then. People have been using 4+ line of text for years around here with mulit-colored text and moments after I change mine I get singled out to use as an excuse? I'll accept coincidence if you say so, but I'll admit I am a little skeptical.
It's something I've had on my list of complaints around here for a while, but it just so happened that seeing it made me remember to make a post about it. It's not against YOU, dude. Don't flatter yourself.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
starman  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood View Post
you just want more room for Bowie.
Well the problem came up originally when I lost the ability to auto-create my sig on the fly. I found I could piggy-back off of other sites, but the smallest I found was 250x50 which prompted my original request. That got shot down, and now I see some people around with much larger text-based sigs and I wonder why we can't grow sigs 50 pixels wider.

And my original point of matching to the left edge of the buttons at the top of the post still stands. The 200 pixel limit was before the redesign and we all accepted it. Now with the redesign, there are buttons at the top of the post that are more than 200 pixels wide, so I can't see any reason to not even it out.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
Well you can't take away width you've already given. That'd be like Apple taking away features when you upgrade the OS.

And the golden rectangle has been sucking MacNNs nut for so long any increase in height is going to be a major improvement.
Well at least 5-10 pixels.
You mean like offering iTools for free nd then charging for .Mac?

MacNN does not use the golden rectangle. Never has. GR is 1:1.618
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood View Post
you just want more room for Bowie.
50 pixels just isn't enough to capture his gold-chain stealing magnificence.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
MacNN does not use the golden rectangle. Never has. GR is 1:1.618
...ok. Don't see anywhere I disagreed with you on that.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
It's something I've had on my list of complaints around here for a while, but it just so happened that seeing it made me remember to make a post about it. It's not against YOU, dude. Don't flatter yourself.
Sure...
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
...ok. Don't see anywhere I disagreed with you on that.
Sorry, I thought you were implying it here;
And the golden rectangle has been sucking MacNNs nut for so long...
I misunderstood you I guess.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:25 PM
 
Sucking the nut as in not getting any respect. Yes, I agree it could have been ambiguous.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by paul w View Post
...
And really, I find that text any color, including black, is distracting. Something softer than the rest of the text is all I'm suggesting.
I agree. From now on, everyone please use [white] text exclusively in sigs. It doesn't distract, and you can say whatever you want.

until we catch you, then you might not be saying anything for a few days
Don't mind me, just having fun. For the record, I'm fine with the sig image size we have now. Big enough to be a recognizable ID badge, and to contain a small message. Small enough to easily ignore the ones that need ignoring, without having to turn them all off in preferences.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
Sucking the nut as in not getting any respect. Yes, I agree it could have been ambiguous.
I need to become more hip.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 03:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Don't mind me, just having fun. For the record, I'm fine with the sig image size we have now. Big enough to be a recognizable ID badge, and to contain a small message. Small enough to easily ignore the ones that need ignoring, without having to turn them all off in preferences.
Your sig is too small and therefore, you opinion should be discounted.
No white text necessary.
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 04:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I agree. From now on, everyone please use [white] text exclusively in sigs. It doesn't distract, and you can say whatever you want.
     
shifuimam
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Somewhere in the Pacific Northwest
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 05:25 PM
 
Incidentally, someone's sig is way too big now.

*cough*Rumor*cough*
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 06:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
Incidentally, someone's sig is way too big now.

*cough*Rumor*cough*
I wasn't gonna say it.
     
rickey939
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cooperstown '09
Status: Offline
Nov 5, 2007, 11:37 PM
 
I love my sig.®
     
Peter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England | San Francisco
Status: Offline
Nov 6, 2007, 06:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader View Post
I'd like to see the sig guidelines restricted actually. 81 x 50 or one line of text.

And although you're offended by my sig starman, don't worry about it. It is only temporary. Just making a point (badly, as usual).
I feel the same way. Quite happy with the image size, I'd like text sigs to be plain text, no colours. 3 lines.
we don't have time to stop for gas
     
SSharon
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Teaneck, NJ
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 12:30 PM
 
I am typically not a big fan of annoying sigs and this is the only forum I visit where I leave them on so that must mean macnn is doing something right.

I haven't seen any text sigs that really distract me and I don't see why the image sigs can't be expanded to be a bit wider.

As long as nothing is animated, you've kept this reader happy.
AT&T iPhone 5S and 6; 13" MBP; MDD G4.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 12:45 PM
 
Meh,

I think the current setup is fine, if we keep expanding it every so often, it will get to the point where they'll be huge and Irritating . I think the current setup is a good balance.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 01:01 PM
 
You could always do what one forum I visit does.
The longer a member you are, and the more you post you are able to have better things in your sig.

Basic member gets one line of text.
Two lines of text.
Small image plus two lines of text (or three lines of text).
And so on.

This way the longest members who contribute (or just post a lot) are able to have a "nicer" sig that they want.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 01:57 PM
 
Sounds like that may contribute to post whoring.

I think 'NN not showing the post count and clamping down on +1 threads has really helped this place, and I think that type of move would just open that problem back up.

One rule for everyone is the most equitable.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:33 PM
 
That is very true, I did forget the "+1" and other things. Though the forum where they have this, you can not quote people and such, so you have to respond and this eliminates though problems. Also if you start just posting to post then you get banned ASAP no questions.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:42 PM
 
My sig can beat up your sig.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
My sig can beat up your sig.
Your sig is to simple and boring.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:45 PM
 
...and your sig is the kind that loses all clarity once reduced to 200x50. I have no idea what I'm looking at.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:49 PM
 
Read my name, it might give you an idea on what purpose my sig is.
Also, it has not been reduced, it is a small piece of a much larger image taken out of context for this purpose.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:50 PM
 
Your sig is... a dream?
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:57 PM
 
It represents an open mind, a dream if you want, or anything you see.
It is meant to be a no answer solution of thought and idea.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 03:59 PM
 
I think you're operating a few levels above what most of us are expecting then.

My sig contains a cartoon chick that talks like a dude.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ View Post
I think you're operating a few levels above what most of us are expecting then.

My sig contains a cartoon chick that talks like a dude.

I enjoy most of the sigs I see, I was just trying to make a joke about his being simple yet his will beat up ours.
I was going to just do a white sig for a super simple idea of an open canvas, but I did not think anyone would understand.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by theDreamer View Post

I enjoy most of the sigs I see, I was just trying to make a joke about his being simple yet his will beat up ours.
I was going to just do a white sig for a super simple idea of an open canvas, but I did not think anyone would understand.
I did that to a few months ago. See if you can figure out who its an homage to...

     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:11 PM
 

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:12 PM
 
???
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:16 PM
 
It is homage to Dakar, and that nothing else needs to be other than Dakar.
Also, Dakar > all.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
Dakarʒ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:19 PM
 
It's a homage to Beatles White Album.

You really are working on a different level here.
     
theDreamer
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Status: Offline
Nov 7, 2007, 04:25 PM
 
Ah, I see.
I grew up way way after the Beatles and do not own any of the albums directly with cover art. The grey around the edges was something I was looking at but only thought you did that as to convey a border, but after looking I see why you did it. Also it is hard to know you like the Beatles.

It is dreams that will survive, for a dream is immortal.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:49 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,