Scratch

lilacfuzz101 wrote:

Cutting off sigs seems to be a bit of a  Yes, there are those with ridiculously HUGE sigs (once i saw one with 4 rows of pictures of babies), but most aren't too bad! Take mine for example- I just got it and also added a one line quote that is now cut off due to WAY too strict standards.

We need a bit more leeway with this... yes, the max hight is supposed to be 150px, but maybe the cut off could be 200-250px? That way way too big sigs will be cut off, but reasonable ones wouldn't be cut off.

What do you think? It just seems a tad overboard. I bet that the Mods and ST members didn't resize reasonable sigs that were just a few pixles over the limit- there certainly wan't any problem from them with how my sig was before...

There was talk about sig heights before a long time ago. The consensus was 150 pixels. and beyond that was overboard, so I don't think the limit would be going any higher than that.

A one-line quote isn't that big. Maybe 170 is enough leeway for a 150px sig and a line. Alternatively, you could just shave a few pixels off the bottom (I estimate 10, maybe 20 px) of your current sig to allow for a quote if the standards aren't going to change anytime soon. 

coolstuff wrote:

Anything past 150 pixels is, in my opinion, way overboard. Personally, I turn signatures off, so unless I'm reviewing a report that says "large signature," I prefer to not see them, because they're a waste of valuable forum space, IMHO.

It's easy to take your images down a notch, as cheddargirl said.

true, but i think a good number of people get their sig pictures (especially for ones that have their username in them) from other people (example: mine) and don't know how to resize them...

cheddargirl wrote:

There was talk about sig heights before a long time ago. The consensus was 150 pixels. and beyond that was overboard, so I don't think the limit would be going any higher than that.

A one-line quote isn't that big. Maybe 170 is enough leeway for a 150px sig and a line. Alternatively, you could just shave a few pixels off the bottom (I estimate 10, maybe 20 px) of your current sig to allow for a quote if the standards aren't going to change anytime soon.

I agree that 150 is reasonable. I agree that some sigs do go overboard. Yes, maybe just 10-20px leeway on the cut off point instead of 50 (i wasn't sure how tall the text was). I'm just not sure how one goes about shaving off some of their sig when they aren't the original creator of the picture (like mine).... Thanks for your opinions guys. I'm just bummed that this came 1 day after i got my new 150px banner 

I totally agree! I was rather annoyed when I found out about it. 

I agree with that part too. Two lines of text isn't really that much to ask, now its down to one line. 

Last edited by CloneCommando1 (2011-05-28 08:51:07)

CloneCommando1 wrote:

I might be wrong, and forgive me if I am, but cheddargirl has a sig of three lines while the rest of us only are allowed to have one. I have nothing against her, but it seems a bit unfair to the rest of us. I mean no insult to her though.

Jonathanpb wrote:

You can sort of use spaces and such to act as lines 

I guess so, but still...

Lines are actually meant as 'line breaks'. Her signature is within that:
<image> break
<fav quote> break
<project pick>

Harakou wrote:

hmnwilson wrote:

Is there a reason this was chosen over just adding a scrollbar to anything over 150px? I'm pretty sure it's not that hard to do, and (to me) it sounds like a good compromise.

Scroll bars are pretty ugly IMO. It really does no justice to the signature or the rest of the page. Personally, I think people should just keep it under 150 px. Maybe a bit of leeway would be reasonable (maybe 10 - 20 px) but 200 px is just way too much. Rules are rules, and signatures should be made with them in mind.

Yeah, I changed it to the height of 2 lines of text in the original post 

LS97 wrote:

CloneCommando1 wrote:

I might be wrong, and forgive me if I am, but cheddargirl has a sig of three lines while the rest of us only are allowed to have one. I have nothing against her, but it seems a bit unfair to the rest of us. I mean no insult to her though.

Jonathanpb wrote:

You can sort of use spaces and such to act as lines 

I guess so, but still...

Lines are actually meant as 'line breaks'. Her signature is within that:
<image> break
<fav quote> break
<project pick>

^Well, you;'re pretty close:

<image>    <quote> break
<project pick>

If you have a long sentence, it automatically wraps around (which is why some sigs, like mine,  stretch over more than two lines). And as LS97 points out, the term "line" refers to number of line breaks, not the number of actual lines in the sig.