Idea: Extend the sig size limit!

[Philantropical]

I dthink it should be changed from 50Kb to 100KB, it's sometimes harder for the sigmakers to reduce the size and stuff like that. I think that the limit should be 100KB or at least minimum 75kb, it'd be much easier for the sigmakers to make sigs for the requester. What do you think?

[zmac]

I came across a big sig that I made only once....
but then again I only started making sigs a week or so ago and have made 2 different ones for the forums
Inlcuding this one...which just fits

[Colin]

It's not hard to make it below 50 kb. I have to put mine at no lower than 85% quality. Which is almost no difference.

[zmac]

Yeh but its not much harder having up to 100kb sig, that way it can be 100% quality

[Andrew]

Moving to NLSC Issues - any site related suggestions or issues, please post there.

We revised the signature limits a while ago, 50 kb was considered a fair maximum due to the fact we decided upon 50 posts per page and a lot of users are still on dialup. That said, I'm open to suggestions but the restriction of 50 kb is there for a reason.

[J@3]

I guess the max I'd go for is 70kb, no more. That being said, if we have this graphic forum at least we can post random sigs we do make that we can't use here. The request a sig thread is a bitch to load.

[alexboom]

Yeh but its not much harder having up to 100kb sig, that way it can be 100% quality

100% quality is useless for pics made for internet

[Ruff Ryder]

What's the point in making a new thread when i can dig bag to 1 year ago and find one that's similar? lol, anyway, can we make the size limit 400x150 or 450x150? The height is really hampering my creativity. Sometimes I find my sig looks better with a few extra pixels but I can't get that here. So, can we por favor? And if we were to increase the physical size, can we make the size like 70 kb as Jae suggested or something around that?

[BIG GREEN]

I don't think the sig sizes should change period. The higher the limit is...the more people will touch and it eventually wanna add more shit to exceed it. It's more than adequate for creativity.

[Ruff Ryder]

Well for instance i made this sig earlier:


It wouldn't look right if it was resized to fit under 100 px height wise.

[Jackal]

Yeah, but there's very little point in having a sig that big when your posts don't even garner that size.

The sig limitations are just fine.

[Andrew]

I have to agree with Yohance. If we keep bumping it up higher and higher to accomodate a couple of signatures, eventually we might as well not have a limit.

[Ruff Ryder]

Well who said that you'd have to keep bumping it up? If you guys are gonna be this tight on the restrictions, then I don't see why it would be a problem in the future. I remember at first after the sig rule there were a few topics about having a bigger limit, but I think I'm the first post about it in a year. So even if you did bump it to 450x150 I doubt you'd get many complaints and you can just be all hard and refuse them like you did everyone else previously...

[BIG GREEN]

Yea...until someone else gets as persistent as you, use you as a reference for their cause and plead favouritism.

[cklitsie]

I'd say loosen up the sig limits but then again.. sometimes these 450x100 max. pieces of crap people dare to call sigs make me want to cry already so I guess I don't want it..

There's another forum I sometimes go to where people have frigging wallpapers as their sigs..

[Ruff Ryder]

Yea...until someone else gets as persistent as you, use you as a reference for their cause and plead favouritism.

Just tell em no like you guys do me.

[Nick]

I'm with Jackal on this one. Big sigs with one sentance posts are useless.

Plus if we make the sig limitations more leniant then we'll have all n00bs taking up room with big sigs and spam posts. I don't want to have a to scroll half a page to read 1 post. It's annoying. A post should take up no more than the words really.

[Ruff Ryder]

A height of 150 px doesn't exactly take up half a page..But forget this I guess since everybody is so against it. Might as well go to no sigs if you guys gonna take sides saying that it's stupid to have sigs that take up more space than a post... And the funny thing about it is that nobody here makes 100% quality posts that take 2-3 paragraphs, even you guys.

But w/e... *walks out of room* .

[Jackal]

If it's only 50 pixels you're so concerned about, why are you making such a fuss about it? What's the point of having that kickass signature of yours you posted up there? Does it serve a purpose? No. Does it look nice? Sure. Does something smaller look nice? Maybe not but learn to make do.

No, nobody makes 100% quality posts but then again not everyone here is me. (Joke, joke, calm.) Seriously, imagine my one liners with an ever increasing sig limit. What for? That sig you posted, imagine it all over the forums with the posting we get around here. Yeah, nice browsing.

The sig dimensions are just dandy. Your suggestion of completely removing the signatures wouldn't bug me either, the signatures serve little purpose besides being flashy.

[Drama Queen]Walks out of room before letting out a fart.[/Drama Queen]

[Andrew]

No need to get so worked up over it. We decided on those limits so as to be fair to people on dial up. With the current avatar and sig limits, it can still be a bit hard on people who are still stuck on 56k.

I don't think it's a necessary change at this time, BUT...if there's a demand for it, I'm happy and willing to consider a change. The thing is, while you're a great contributor TBD and I'm glad to have posters like you around, I can't change forum policy/rules to suit just one person or a few people; I'd be constantly making changes back and forth in an effort to satisfy everyone and that wouldn't be fair to anyone. But as I said if more people support the idea I am as always willing to discuss it further and then perhaps make some amendments, so if there's more folks out there who are in favour of changes, let me know. My initial answer would be no, but that needn't be my final one if the demand is there.

[alexboom]

Like Andrew, Yohance & co I'm against extending the sig size limit. Great designers should know how to make nice sigs in restricted spaces And 350 x 100 is already big when you look at these thousands one line posts.

[Null17]

Cosign on what alexboom said

[Andrew]

And 350 x 100 is already big when you look at these thousands one line posts.

450 x 100 actually.

[alexboom]

then down the limitation to 350! Haha my bad, you've got an eye everywhere Andrew

[shadowgrin]

But w/e... *walks out of room*

That just screams teen drama queen.

I don't find the reason to have bigger sigs than what the NLSC already has, it is a forum mostly about a basketball videogame and not a graphics forum (deviant art, etc.) to justify it. If the NLSC is a graphics forum then..

..where people have frigging wallpapers as their sigs..

would just be rightfully ok.