It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:59 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: my sig has gone!
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:37 pm 
Offline
Asian Leopard Cat

Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:17 am
Posts: 626
Location: Wiltshire
Hi,
I have just changed my email address on my profile and it said my sig was too long. Well its the same as its always been, i noticed it said the sig had a 25 character limit, but it wasn't a problem before - help please
xx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 4:45 pm 
Offline
The Boss
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 1:41 am
Posts: 1240
PM sent...



Some sigs have been way in excess of what's realistic.

When a sig takes up almost half the screen without including the reply something is wrong, those few who this applies to have been asked a number of times in the past to reduce the size, most of these requests been simply ignored, and now one appears to have grown in size again. Enough is Enough!

If your present sig is reasonable then there's nothing to be concerned about, although any changes made will have to comply with the new allowance - so don't change would be the wise thing to do.

Unfortunately, until the person with the last remaining massive sig finally listens, the character allowance will remain limited.

Any comments welcomed ofc...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 4:53 pm 
Offline
Asian Leopard Cat

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:28 am
Posts: 6038
Location: UK
what is a reasonable size? i often worry mine is too big as i think steph once told me it was?? xx

_________________
Image
Image

Miki & My Beloved Bengals http://mybelovedbengals.blogspot.com/

Shiloh, Darcy, Rudy The Roodster & Ozzy...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 5:20 pm 
Offline
The Boss
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 1:41 am
Posts: 1240
Yours is fine Miki, as are most others.


I'm sure you all know which ones are excessive, full size pictures etc etc. After a few moans in the past we have spoken with those that have massive sigs, it's the fact of being ignored repeatedly by one in particular that has led us here now.

Sorry if it affects anyone unduly but it's the only option left...what else can be done?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:16 pm 
Offline
Asian Leopard Cat

Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3399
Location: Scotland - Paisley
Not sure what difference a character limit will make to be honest. It is the picture size that is the issue and a 25 character limit will only restrict the size of the URL pointing to it. Unless the character limit is something other than the actual number of characters in the sig box.

I agree it is extremely annoying when people put full size images in a sig, my poor middle mouse button is seriously overworked. Really is is common sense, I think half the problem is some people have no idea how to crop a picture down or make a reasonable size sig pic. But then all they have to do is ask, there are plenty of people about who can help them out :-S

I would say that anything over 600 x 200 pixels is excessive, if I remember correctly I think I make mine 600 x 150 and I think that gives plenty of space to do a nice sig pic.

Perhaps it may be worth putting something to that effect into the forum rules - Sig pics must be no larger than 600 x 200 pixels - and if people repeatedly ignore it then suggest next time they will be leaving the forum.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:53 pm 
Offline
The Boss
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 1:41 am
Posts: 1240
Louise-paisley wrote:
Not sure what difference a character limit will make to be honest. It is the picture size that is the issue and a 25 character limit will only restrict the size of the URL pointing to it. Unless the character limit is something other than the actual number of characters in the sig box.


You're right Lou of course, but it does the Job and that'll do for me! :wink:



Louise-paisley wrote:
I agree it is extremely annoying when people put full size images in a sig, my poor middle mouse button is seriously overworked. Really is is common sense, I think half the problem is some people have no idea how to crop a picture down or make a reasonable size sig pic. But then all they have to do is ask, there are plenty of people about who can help them out :-S

I would say that anything over 600 x 200 pixels is excessive, if I remember correctly I think I make mine 600 x 150 and I think that gives plenty of space to do a nice sig pic.

Perhaps it may be worth putting something to that effect into the forum rules - Sig pics must be no larger than 600 x 200 pixels - and if people repeatedly ignore it then suggest next time they will be leaving the forum.


I've asked many times for sigs to be reduced, we've even had a thread about it, anytime somebody moans about the subject by PM I always follow it up. It's fair enough, why should people have to replace middle mouse buttons. :lol: Just joking around there! :wink:

It would feel draconian to have strict size limits etc etc don't you agree? It's one of those things that can just be left to common sense just as you say Louise...provided common sense is flowing through the genes as it should there's no problems I guess. :lol:

Because we're still running phpBB2 here we would struggle to find an existing script to accommodate limiting sig sizes, we already have one that covers avatars but my search for a sig one is fruitless. We can have one written for us, thankfully Heidi is a software developer so it's not that much of a problem, finding the time would be more the issue. That said we would also have to host the sig images ourselves, this might cause further complications retrospectively, although the software would resize any images they would have to fulfil a certain criteria.

Maybe upgrading to phpBB3 would be the best option, although how that would impact on the day to day look of the site may not appeal to some, when I looked into this last year I read a lot of comments about forums wanting to roll-back to phpBB2. I guess all changes take time to adjust...

Progression or comfort zone?



All because.....massive sigs. :roll:



Word(s) of the day - common sense. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:40 pm 
Offline
Asian Leopard Cat

Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3399
Location: Scotland - Paisley
meemonkey wrote:
Louise-paisley wrote:
Not sure what difference a character limit will make to be honest. It is the picture size that is the issue and a 25 character limit will only restrict the size of the URL pointing to it. Unless the character limit is something other than the actual number of characters in the sig box.


You're right Lou of course, but it does the Job and that'll do for me! :wink:



Louise-paisley wrote:
I agree it is extremely annoying when people put full size images in a sig, my poor middle mouse button is seriously overworked. Really is is common sense, I think half the problem is some people have no idea how to crop a picture down or make a reasonable size sig pic. But then all they have to do is ask, there are plenty of people about who can help them out :-S

I would say that anything over 600 x 200 pixels is excessive, if I remember correctly I think I make mine 600 x 150 and I think that gives plenty of space to do a nice sig pic.

Perhaps it may be worth putting something to that effect into the forum rules - Sig pics must be no larger than 600 x 200 pixels - and if people repeatedly ignore it then suggest next time they will be leaving the forum.


I've asked many times for sigs to be reduced, we've even had a thread about it, anytime somebody moans about the subject by PM I always follow it up. It's fair enough, why should people have to replace middle mouse buttons. :lol: Just joking around there! :wink:

It would feel draconian to have strict size limits etc etc don't you agree? It's one of those things that can just be left to common sense just as you say Louise...provided common sense is flowing through the genes as it should there's no problems I guess. :lol:

Because we're still running phpBB2 here we would struggle to find an existing script to accommodate limiting sig sizes, we already have one that covers avatars but my search for a sig one is fruitless. We can have one written for us, thankfully Heidi is a software developer so it's not that much of a problem, finding the time would be more the issue. That said we would also have to host the sig images ourselves, this might cause further complications retrospectively, although the software would resize any images they would have to fulfil a certain criteria.

Maybe upgrading to phpBB3 would be the best option, although how that would impact on the day to day look of the site may not appeal to some, when I looked into this last year I read a lot of comments about forums wanting to roll-back to phpBB2. I guess all changes take time to adjust...

Progression or comfort zone?



All because.....massive sigs. :roll:



Word(s) of the day - common sense. :wink:


But Luke, the problem is you are now punishing the people who try to use a correctly sized sig pic with a long url, and not doing anything automatically to those who already have a huge sig pic.

I don't think it is draconian to insist on an upper size limit, in fact an awful lot of forum owners out there do have strict limits and quite rightly so IMO. I have been on several forums where there is one warning about it and then you are deleted.

It's not just middle buttons either, I was on the forum on a laptop the other day and it was even more frustrating to have to scroll horizontally by over half a screen width to try and follow the text because of huge images screwing with the layout.

I have a script on my forum which adds width & height attributes to the img tags, so if any image posted anywhere on the forum, hosted in my gallery or externally, is above a limit it puts attributes in the tags to display at the max size only, it does not resize the image it just limits the size it is displayed at. I guess it would be tricky to implement something like that just for sigs though.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:28 pm 
Offline
The Boss
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 1:41 am
Posts: 1240
A bit harsh that Louise - more of a temporary restriction rather than punishment.

Sigs that are in place now aren't affected, and it's not like it's a permanant measure in any case, I thought I made that clear enough. It's only until we find an alternative solution.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:53 pm 
Offline
Asian Leopard Cat

Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3399
Location: Scotland - Paisley
meemonkey wrote:
A bit harsh that Louise - more of a temporary restriction rather than punishment.

Sigs that are in place now aren't affected, and it's not like it's a permanant measure in any case, I thought I made that clear enough. It's only until we find an alternative solution.


No I don't think it was exactly harsh, you know what I mean though..

Someone who has a perfectly acceptable sig pic cannot use it if they have a long url, but someone who has a whopping great big one can if the have a short URL.. It's not exactly addressing the actual issue is it, you would have been more fair to prevent sigs at all than limit the characters.

You get my drift?

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by meemonkey