Super Soaker Central

Signature images have been disabled as a test for the past few days. Did anyone noticed that signature images are disabled? Not yet from what I know.

I disabled the signature images after receiving an email (or was it an IM?) from a dialup user who browses our forum a lot. Now, of course he wasn't a guest because guests can't view signatures (from what I know). These images only slowed down his browsing - they enhanced nothing.

That's part of why I never understood the whole signature image thing. Yes, they are neat little images, but they don't really do anything but waste bandwidth!

I've made this a poll to see what people think after hearing this. Are signature images important enough to have them or should we focus more on other things?

I noticed it.

I voted Yes, Have Sig Images. But they need to be really small file sizes. Gifs or something.

File size is what would matter then, not file type. JPEG is better for some images and GIF is better for others. I've found that it is hard if not impossible to fully moderate signatures

Many forums (in fact, most I have been a member of) do not allow images in signatures. There is a large potential for abuse, most of which we have not seen. If someone could explain the exact purpose of signature images to me, I may simply just let this issue return later if it becomes a problem. I don't just want to hear that signature images exist "for fun" because they really don't.

Also, signatures can be turned off, but signature images can not be turned off by an individual user. Most if not all people want to see signatures, but not all want to see signature images. If a modification could be made to fix this, that would be an excellent feature.

I thought it over and really don't think sig images are such a great idea, but avatars are a must.

I agree. I would never disable avatars because I find that I identify people much more often by them. If you would like to vote again, I believe I might be able to allow you to by editing the database, but I haven't ever tampered with the data like that. Sadly there isn't a feature in the Admin CP to do this.

Sorry for forgetting about this thread! I have re-enabled signature images for the moment. If they become a problem, I will disable them again. Most people didn't complain really, just voted. Discussion didn't get worse either (in fact I think it got better!).

Just please increase the amount of text I can enter into the sig. If not that's ok.

I don't know where the "delete" button went, so someone else will have to.

Really large text sigs tend to annoy people. Same with overly large images in their sigs. But that hasn't been too much of an issue for quite some time.

For some reason, this skin lacks a delete button. You have to delete in the edit page for some reason. This is terrible usability, but I haven't seen it like that on other vBulletin forums, so I am assuming that it's to make this old vB2 skin appear more realistic.

I wish that there was a way to simply limit the actual size of signature images. That would be a most excellent modification because those rules are hard and annoying to enforce.

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/archive/ ... 83146.html

There are a few updates for it so make sure to use those.

Thanks for finding that modification! I'll need to upgrade to vBulletin 3.5 later this week and once I do, that will be the second thing I install, right after vBSEO.

I guess the votes aren't that important now that RacerSoaker445 found that modification, but I still made my vote: Images should not be allowed in signatures. As everybody else says, they are pointless, distracting, and force pages to take longer to load (text is still fine). Although I don't really notice anybody's avatars or signatures, I think avatars, at least, should be kept--they aren't "clumsy" and blaring as such, and they seem more creative than just repeating you username in fancy text with a fancy background.