Infractions for Signature Violations

And a ban it is. Read the rules.

THIS ISNT A NEW RULE, THIS RULE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER 2 YEARS :bbpd:

 

I use the graphics forum and thats not my beliefs...

If you were ever going to sell your work you'd need to work to the clients specifications

So if the client (who is paying say, £10 a banner) asked you for a banner 750 x 200px would you say "NO WAY MAN THATS WAY TO BIG I'M NOT MAKING THAT"

If you're really good a graphics, you should be able to work around things like rules to meet the needs of other people...


oh and btw, if you do have big sigs you're just being really selfish as maybe there are other celtic fans (with a slow connection say dial-up)wanting to read threads about Celtic quickly, instead of waiting 5mins for a page to load because of a meaningless picture


PS. *, I love the bold feature too much

 

Yep thats it keep making * speaches then post them.

 

But Dazza is correct in what he's saying so pipe down.

 

Having a small signature a touchy subject for you?

Are they really that important to you?


"Yep thats it keep making *, oversized sigs and fill half a page when you post "

 

Ye see Marie, signatures are like * extensions from some of these people!

 

My sigs bigger than yours!

 

I have a circumcised sig.

 

Actually easier to read threads tbh. A lot of debate generated by this too.

What about posting huge images or Victoria Bekums?? Does that affect bandwidth?

(Even though sh'es skinny)....

 

Yeah, and I reckon the Beckum's Boozums affect bandwidth more since the * job.

Better post old phoaties to be on the safe side, eh?

(Absolutely NO Pamela Andersons...btw)

 

What about beer guts?

No close up side on shots of Dustin hoffman either.

 

Although I have Sigs turned off, I'm pretty pleased about mine. Small yet witty - for me, at least.

 

No, but the question about images is related. Not the * directly, but the size of images posted surely affects it. Yet again I'm a complete ignoramus. I just thought La Beckum's * could be 20kb each.

Even if most of her pixels ARE silicon.

Just got me thinking that's all.

 

without wanting to feel the wrath, why are we being punsihed with an infraction if you didn't enforce your own rules? Like I say, I don't want to stir * because of this, but it seems a little unfair that because you let it slide and then suddenly changed your mind, everyone who hadn't logged on within the 24 hours of the post got an infraction. I may be considered a regular with the post count I have, but I've only used it for 4 months. I've never read any rules on forums and if I've ever broken a rule on a forum, regardless of the length of time I've used it, I always get a warning first time round.

I agree with why your doing it, just wondering the above. I didn't read the rules and yes that's my fault, but I looked around everyone elses sig and some were massive, mine was reasonable (53.4KB, 500x190'ish), so I assumed there wasn't any sort of limit (again, without reading the rules I accept that). OK, maybe my fault for making that assumption, but if I never seen anyone else with massive sigs I would have realised there was a ruling on sigs and made mine the appropriate size.

 

What does it mean.?...... {/sense}