Scratch

A size limit I think would be best. And maybe no animations because they distract the user (even though CFCRubiks account has a really funny LOTR signature) from everything.

andresmh wrote:

A few weeks ago someone asked if we could enable having images on signatures. I agreed as an experimental thing. Now a lot of people have this kind of signatures and I personally find them a bit intrusive as they increase the time it takes to render a page plus they add too much visual noise to my browsing. I am considering going back to no images on the signature. However, I understand that this is just my opinion and that probably a lot of people might disagree with me.  What do you think? Should we set at least limit on the size of the image that we all agree??

I would like to see the animated images disabled.  I find the constant flashing to be very distracting when I am trying to read and understand a complicated post.

Jens wrote:

...

Maybe a nice feature would be to show each user's profile picture under their name in each post, with a link directly taking the reader to their "MyStuff" page, instead. That way, signature-graphics would essentially become obsolete.

I like Jens' suggestion to "show each user's profile picture under their name."  That is how the Alice forum is organized, and I find that when I'm in a hurry, I can scan down through a long series of posts rather quickly, stopping to read only those containing the picture of someone that I know usually has something important to say.  Then later, I go back and read the posts in between.  In 1980, I would have told you that I thought the idea of putting little pictures (later known as icons) on the computer screen was silly, but in the 28 years since then, I have come to appreciate those little pictures as just one more way of causing my brain to work more efficiently.

Eh, Can you just give us 4 lines then? I know a way to get around the 2 line limit but It is rather hard and I would rather just have 4 lines.

JSO wrote:

I agree animated signature graphics are annoying. On the other site, people (especially kids) might be more  interested in participating the scratch forums when they have 'fun' things like images in signatures.

When the Scratch team would consider too still allow images in signatures, a size limit should be implemented, same for animation...

I liked it to put an image into my signature - i tried to keep it as less disturbing as possible (very small height, white color, no animation)

And you succeded, I don't find your signature distracting at all.

Paddle2See wrote:

...  I hesitate to even endorse having the user's icon image in the posting as many of those are animated as well and they drive me nuts...

I hadn't considered the fact that user's icon images are sometimes animated, so I would like to withdraw my endorsement of Jens' recommendation in this regard unless the images are restricted to be relatively small with no animation.

By the way, I also have no problem with the image in JSO's signature.  It is not obtrusive at all.

andresmh wrote:

A few weeks ago someone asked if we could enable having images on signatures.

that was me

andresmh wrote:

Should we set at least limit on the size of the image that we all agree??

yes. you could make them small enough to speed up the loading of the site, but not so small that they are not readable.

It would be very difficult to automatically restrict the size of the images on signatures because the images are not hosted in our site.

I see these three options:
1. No images at all
2. Images of any size.
3. Allow images of any size and politely ask each one of those with big images to reduce their size.

I don't think #3 will really work and we have enough in our hands trying to keep up monitoring for other things. Also, having to ask people causes a bit of tension because it seems as if they are being told they did something wrong and might make people feel bad.

It seems that older users (myself included) would prefer #1 and most young users would prefer #2.

I'm actually leaning towards #1 since that's how the forums were for a long time and I do not see that much value added to having the images. Maybe we should instead put some work in including the avatar.

andresmh wrote:

It would be very difficult to automatically restrict the size of the images on signatures because the images are not hosted in our site.

I see these three options:
1. No images at all
2. Images of any size.
3. Allow images of any size and politely ask each one of those with big images to reduce their size.

I don't think #3 will really work and we have enough in our hands trying to keep up monitoring for other things. Also, having to ask people causes a bit of tension because it seems as if they are being told they did something wrong and might make people feel bad.

It seems that older users (myself included) would prefer #1 and most young users would prefer #2.

I'm actually leaning towards #1 since that's how the forums were for a long time and I do not see that much value added to having the images. Maybe we should instead put some work in including the avatar.

I'm an older user but I still think that number 3 would be best. MyRedNedptune is already enforcing number 3. You should take a vote.

I have removed my banner in favor of a one word signature. Hope it helps lighten the graphical load a bit!

Mayhem wrote:

Get rid of them...

I'm with Mayhem on this one - more trouble than they are worth.

For the signiture there should be no pictures, that will reduce the time for the web page to load up, and then allow 1 line of typing or for the signature have it as a Status for the whole website not just the forums instead of a signature