Is there a reason why we can't use signature images?

[coachfraley]

I as just wondering why that feature was disabled?

Did it get out of control or something?

I spent a bunch of time making a sig. image, and then I tried to paste it in and...hey! lol

Not complaining, just wondering.

Here is what I was going to use:
[Only Registered Users Can See Links.]

[LosC]

Would take too much space maybe? I can imagine ppl that dont know how to resize pics would put huge pics in there sig. Maybe we could host pics on our sig with a maximum size limit.

[coachfraley]

If people used linked images, it wouldn't take up any space on the server. I agree though, that there should be a size limit.

[Mvjnz]

They are stupid and unecessary? In the forums where people are allowed to use them, half of the page consists of distracting images, most of which are ugly.

[LosC]

In the forums where people are allowed to use them, half of the page consists of distracting images, most of which are ugly.

Yeah true, but we could limit the size to a banner or a small pic

[NickFish]

Have any of you ever seen those littl bars that say "My 50g tank is ____ days ___months and ____years old? And they have a little fish or something moving along the bar. Right Here ([Only Registered Users Can See Links.]).

I think it would be cool to have those.

But the reason we don't have pics, is that people would make them very big.
People could make them very ugly.
And it would take longer to download the page.

[angelcakes]

Have any of you ever seen those littl bars that say "My 50g tank is ____ days ___months and ____years old? And they have a little fish or something moving along the bar. Right Here ([Only Registered Users Can See Links.]).

I think it would be cool to have those.

But the reason we don't have pics, is that people would make them very big.
People could make them very ugly.
And it would take longer to download the page.
definately takes ages to download,the bigger the sig is the less room on one page:14:

[cocoa_pleco]

i agree with a size limit, on a old GTA forum i was on, if your image was too large you would have a red lining around your image meaning it was too large, if there was a green lining it was a acceptable size.

if any mods caught you with red lining around your image, you were banned from having images at all

[crackatinny]

i agree with a size limit, on a old GTA forum i was on, if your image was too large you would have a red lining around your image meaning it was too large, if there was a green lining it was a acceptable size.

if any mods caught you with red lining around your image, you were banned from having images at all

Cocoa, you are banned for having a rapper as an avator:hmm3grin2orange: , only kidding.

I am pretty sure it does come down to a size issue with the sigs, remember all the sigs with big bold print not long back, before we asked for them to be toned down a little?

[Incredulous_Ed]

It does slow down things a bit, and makes the page harder to read. That is acually one of the reasons I like AA, because it is easy on the eyes.

[Lady Hobbs]

I don't care for the signatures either only because people abuse them. Even here some of the signatures are much larger than needed.......like every single plant you have and every single fish. LOL

Signatures just end up too much and too large with sparkles, flashing, etc.

[smaug]

I don't care for the signatures either only because people abuse them. Even here some of the signatures are much larger than needed.......like every single plant you have and every single fish. LOL

Signatures just end up too much and too large with sparkles, flashing, etc.
If you keep the font size small,then it makes perfect sence to have most, if not all of your plants and fish in your sig,it saves on questions from posters about what all you have and makes it easier and faster to help someone.Having you main equipment list is a time saver as well.:14: I want a smily with its tongue sticking out:c1: