95 replies to this topic

[Superkalle]

As a frequent reader and participant on this excellent forum, I find it annoying with overly large signatures. With text and images some can be 400-500 pixels in height. It's wasting a lot of space and forcing you to scroll excessively. As it is today, I've had to turn off "Show Signatures" in my profile, which is sad because at time sigantures can both amusing and informative.

I read in the forum rules ( http://www.eurobrick...;hl=Signatures: ) that signature images are supposed to be max 300 pixels heigh. May I propose a maxium height of 50 pixels, and a maxium of 3-4 rows of text. It would make the forum look leaner and be easier to browse.

Just my 5 cents

[Front]

I'll add another 5 cent, though we are at a total of 10 cents now  

[Sinner]

I do agree on a reduction. While I think 50 pixels is too little, I also think 300 is too much. Personally I find that 120 pixels in height is a good size, and that's what I've been using for years. I was the one who wrote that rule and it was meant as a reminder of what is way too much... but I suspect some see it as a target!  

However, the problem often is enforcement and priorities. For example I find the avatar issue a more pressing one, and I'm failing at that too. With 8953 members it's a lot of effort to deal with every oversized signature so we tend to PM members who go too far, but it's a fine line between trying to please members who want small signatures, and those that want the freedom to post as big as they darn well want to. For the record we are actually considering changing the rules as there are more and more cases of large and often pointless signatures.

I do appreciate you sharing your concerns. It's good when members do this as often we're accused of enforcing rules that no one cares about, when I know for a fact that many do.  

Front, on Apr 18 2010, 08:13 PM, said:

I'll add another 5 cent, though we are at a total of 10 cents now  

15.  

[Ralph_S]

superkalle, on Apr 18 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

As a frequent reader and participant on this excellent forum, I find it annoying with overly large signatures. With text and images some can be 400-500 pixels in height. It's wasting a lot of space and forcing you to scroll excessively. As it is today, I've had to turn off "Show Signatures" in my profile, which is sad because at time sigantures can both amusing and informative.

I read in the forum rules ( http://www.eurobrick...;hl=Signatures: ) that signature images are supposed to be max 300 pixels heigh. May I propose a maxium height of 50 pixels, and a maxium of 3-4 rows of text. It would make the forum look leaner and be easier to browse.

Just my 5 cents

I completely agree that the large signatures are annoying. I've had my options set to not show signatures for months now and I haven't missed them for a second. I didn't realise quite how bad things had become in the meantime until I read a few things on Eurobricks without being logged in a few days ago (I wasn't on my own computer) and found I had a hard time finding the actual content of the messages between all the pictures, coloured text and things blinking at me.

Cheers,
Ralph

[Rapseflaps]

It is possible to put a limit on the number of images, URL's and lines of text allowed in signatures in the board's settings. I don't know if the board will automatically adjust old sigs that exceed that limit though (I think it doesn't, so you'd still be left with the problem of having to inform old members their sigs are too large).

Same for avatars, btw.

[Smithy]

Another 5 cents for this.  It is often hard to work out what is content and what is a signature.

[AwesomeStar]

Earlier this week I dropped a couple of lines from my signature because I personally thought it was just a bit too big.

I think a reasonable height should be proposed, but I have no idea what.

~A.S.

[Rick]

AwesomeStar, on Apr 18 2010, 05:08 PM, said:

I think a reasonable height should be proposed, but I have no idea what.

Well, there you go  

Siegfried, on Apr 18 2010, 12:39 PM, said:

I do agree on a reduction. While I think 50 pixels is too little, I also think 300 is too much. Personally I find that 120 pixels in height is a good size, and that's what I've been using for years. I was the one who wrote that rule and it was meant as a reminder of what is way too much... but I suspect some see it as a target!  

By that standard I guess mine is one or two lines too high  

[Darth Legolas]

Wait... isn't it 2 cents?

[Rapseflaps]

Darth Legolas, on Apr 18 2010, 07:07 PM, said:

Wait... isn't it 2 cents?

Yes.

Apparently, there's some rich people showing off here.

[Darth Legolas]

Rapseflaps, on Apr 18 2010, 01:15 PM, said:

Yes.

Apparently, there's some rich people showing off here.

If I found a nickel, I'd put it in my sig.

120 sounds good.

[Forresto]

I would agree with this, however what are you guys considering to change the rules to Siegfried?

[Superkalle]

Please guys, stick to the topic.

Edited by superkalle, 18 April 2010 - 06:53 PM.

[Sinner]

Rapseflaps, on Apr 18 2010, 08:49 PM, said:

It is possible to put a limit on the number of images, URL's and lines of text allowed in signatures in the board's settings. I don't know if the board will automatically adjust old sigs that exceed that limit though (I think it doesn't, so you'd still be left with the problem of having to inform old members their sigs are too large).

This feature sounds good, but it's largely useless unless you want to reduce signatures to 50 characters. Afterall, a link to a small image can be the same size as a link to a large one. As an FYI, it doesn't affect existing signatures.

Forresto, on Apr 19 2010, 02:42 AM, said:

I would agree with this, however what are you guys considering to change the rules to Siegfried?

Many things but the part we keep having trouble finding a good solution to is finding a clear rule that is easily understandable and not easily abused. For example a maximum file size would be beyond some members technical knowledge.

Darth Legolas, on Apr 19 2010, 02:07 AM, said:

Wait... isn't it 2 cents?

Rapseflaps, on Apr 19 2010, 02:15 AM, said:

Yes.

Apparently, there's some rich people showing off here.

Many countries (including Australia) phased out low cent coins a while back. But let's discuss world currencies another time.  

Rick, on Apr 19 2010, 02:01 AM, said:

By that standard I guess mine is one or two lines too high  

Actually yours is only slightly taller than mine and I think it's still small.

[Shadows]

Siegfried, on Apr 18 2010, 07:36 PM, said:

Actually yours is only slightly taller than mine and I think it's still small.

Mine is too big.

It's things I'm doing and links to things I want linked to (like the old billboard of doom almost) and the pictures themselves are small. I want a banner for PoP month in there, but that would push it over the line.

If it could employ full html, it would be much smaller, plus I don't wan to risk it getting warped by people using ridiculously narrow resolutions (I've heard there are still people on 800x600... *gasp*)

[Sisco]

Yes, I am for Signature reduction.  120 sounds ideal to me.  I have to agree, excessive scrolling gets hard on the fingers   .

[Zzz]

Animated signatures are worse than big ones, or at least to me. They make my browser freek out.

Still, smaller is better to me, but 50 is too small. I would like to see if it's worth to click the link, if an MOC is worth a visit. Difficult with 50pix. Just me though.

[Rick]

Siegfried, on Apr 19 2010, 01:36 AM, said:

Actually yours is only slightly taller than mine and I think it's still small.

I reduced it by one line as a result of this topic, but yeah, I considered myself abiding to the intent of the rules.

Zzz, on Apr 19 2010, 06:57 AM, said:

Animated signatures are worse than big ones, or at least to me.

That's the problem with over-regulating something. People would try to find ways to make something incredibly annoying that's 50 pixels in height, flashes, has animated GIFs, and horrible text-colors. But the current 'maximum' of 300 pixels could perhaps be reduced a little.

[Sinner]

Rick, on Apr 19 2010, 03:56 PM, said:

That's the problem with over-regulating something. People would try to find ways to make something incredibly annoying that's 50 pixels in height, flashes, has animated GIFs, and horrible text-colors. But the current 'maximum' of 300 pixels could perhaps be reduced a little.

As a general rule we don't tolerate animated GIFs.

One of the big problems the staff face is making a comprehensive set of guidelines that are not so big that no one will read them. But when my time frees up ( ) I'll re-bring this up with the staff.

[Superkalle]

A tip to reduce the total height of the Signature could be to place any text to the side of the pics, like in Siegfrieds signature. But then the question: How do you do that? Table in HTML?

[Sinner]

superkalle, on Apr 19 2010, 04:28 PM, said:

A tip to reduce the total height of the Signature could be to place any text to the side of the pics, like in Siegfrieds signature. But then the question: How do you do that? Table in HTML?

No, no HTML needed. (Or allowed!   ) I was actually one of the first on EB to do signatures like that as I wanted more pictures without the bulk. How do you do it? It's really easy when you know how! This is the code of my current signature.

[center][url="http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=39201"][img]http://de-classic-space.com/photo/ruler/DSC04758ess.JPG[/img][/url]  [url="http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=38900"][img]http://de-classic-space.com/photo/twileks/DSC04824ess.JPG[/img][/url]  [url="http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=38433"][img]http://de-classic-space.com/photo/bulldozer/DSC04789ess.JPG[/img][/url]  [img]http://brickzone.net/images/eurobricks/red_moon/characters/avatars/siegourney.jpg[/img] ([b]Siegourney[/b] in [color="#FF0000"]Red Moon[/color])[/center]

The key thing is that you don't hit return/enter after each picture / text-block and put a space there instead. It's that easy! (I've noticed a lot of people add a dash or similar between pictures, but I don't understand why....)

As for the actual text it isn't a win all solution; it only works for small amounts.

[Holodoc]

As a big fan of small images I do have to admit my event countdown got a bit too big.
Especially when you browse the site with a screen resolution below 1024x768 pixels (the photos will be shown in two rows then).

I will do it better next time. Promised.

[Oky]

I too get annoyed by large sigs. Sometimes it's because of large pictures, but often it's because of set wish lists. What's the deal with those? Why do people want to have a list of all the sets they want to show up after every single post they make? It serves no other purpose than clutter up the forum. Therefore, I propose an anti-wish-list policy. Anybody agree?

[Fugazi]

Huge rant following, please just skip if you're easily offended!

If I may say so, I can rarely found anything really valuable in people's signatures. I don't care about what set they reviewed, if I need to look up a review I use the convenient indexes in the relevant theme forum. I could be sometimes be interested in their personal web sites, blogs, flickr pages, facebook accounts and so on, but all that information should better be included in their profile page, just a click away. Actually most of the signature information could easily be moved over there and thus unclutter each and every post. I challenge you to show me something really useful included in a signature, that really needs to be repeated with every post and take up about 50% of the screen and bandwidth of every forum page I download? I'm not suggesting that signatures should be banned, but some people should think a little more about the usefulness of the information they publish time and again with every post.

Perhaps one day I will turn 'show signatures' back on and be pleasantly surprised of the self-control of the posting members. Until then...

End rant!  

[Superkalle]

I think Siegfrieds signature is the maxium size. Anything over that is to large. I also think all text in a Signature should be italic and of one font size. This to make it easy distinguisable from the post text.  It's kind of funny I suppose (hope no one gets offended), but with all the avatars, badges and signatures with colors, fonts, sizes and pictures in every possible direction, sometimes if feels like you're watching Borat's webpage.  

Edited by superkalle, 19 April 2010 - 06:44 PM.