Discussion about signatures

[CaFordDude]

Since I have been back and online more I have noticed that the sig's as a whole seem to have grown. There are many things that go into a site deciding how big, if at all to allow sig's. Are pictures allowed, text only, quotes or are they software limited by the site admins so everyone has a very vanilla size and shape. There are site issues to think about such as bandwidth as well as user issues to think about such as internet access speed and screen size. Some very knowledgeable users here are on dial up for one reason or another.

One option is for users to turn signatures OFF in their control panel if they are affecting their experience here at FTF too much.

Early on the admin here at FTF decided on a basic size "RECOMMENDATION" for signatures. This is still the current recommendation from the Admins.

That size was/is:

1.5 times that size is:

And the largest sig I have seen here at FTF is about double the recommended size:

Right now the sigs do not seem to be negatively affecting the sites performance. Admin's is that correct? One thing we want to avoid is when are usership is double or triple what it is now how do we then wrangle that many more sigs into compliance when/if it is affecting the site performance. I think we would also like to avoid what some other sites have done and that is to control the sig size by software.

What do you guys think? It doesn't really affect my sig since it is generally only text and kept pretty minimal but it may effect some of the other users here. You notice I used solid black boxes to represent the sig sizes as opposed to any actual user sig's. If you read this post and think it is directed at you then maybe your sig is too big or you have a guilty conscience for some other atrocity you have committed I don't know but I will say this, that if there was someone's sig that I found obnoxiously big or otherwise ridiculous I would just tell you to change it.

We are a community of users and therefore should strive to have the best overall environment possible, sometimes forgoing our personal opinions/feelings for those of the whole.

P.S. Thanks Skandocious for the images.

 

[Skandocious]

Here's my 2 cents...

If you're the type of person that wants to have images in your signature, especially photograph-type images like mine, then it is best to host it on a 3rd party site such as imageshack. Once hosted elsewhere, you can simply use IMG tags the same way you do to embed images in your posts. Doing this instead of hosting the images on FTF helps take the load off our servers and keep the site running at minimal cost.

As far as bandwidth goes-- that's my main concern.


The other thing to think about here is size. Regardless of whether it is a large image, a buttload of text+quotes, or a mix of both, size should be the main consideration when designing your sig. This is mostly out of courtesy to the other members-- because if you've got a really tall signature, and you post 5 times on a page of 10 posts, every person that reads it has to scroll past a huge signature 5 times. Lots of scrolling, and it can be irritating to some users.

So the main things to keep in mind are-- if you want fancy images, it's better to host them on image hosting websites, if possible. And when designing your signature, try to get the width and height as close to the 1st black box as possible.

Disclaimer: I don't personally care all that much about large sigs (unless they're redonkulous), but when I was a moderator I had personal experience with lots of members who were very aggravated by it. FTF just wants to make sure that the site is comfortable so that people will wanna keep coming back and contributing.

Be courteous people

 

[nobodyspecial]

I suggest a 0x0 maximum image size for pictures in sigs. I feel they just clutter up threads.

 

[LEB Ben]

Aww hell...I always thought that size suggestion was just for sig pics...I never realized text/quotes and whatnot were a strain and included in that size.

 

[Skandocious]

Aww hell...I always thought that size suggestion was just for sig pics...I never realized text/quotes and whatnot were a strain and included in that size.

The text and quotes and stuff are really just a matter of courtesy. When I used to put quotes in my signature I would squeeze them down in width, in Photoshop, so that I could put them next to my sig graphic and not make my overall sig super tall. Here's an example:

 

[Austin]

Hmm. Skan, make me a pretty and compliant sig.

 

[Skandocious]

Hmm. Skan, make me a pretty and compliant sig.

This better not turn into one of THOSE threads.

 

[Austin]

This better not turn into one of THOSE threads.

I can if I don't get that sig.

 

[Austin]

You know, that third sig size looks familiar to a 3 letter name-d person who has posted in this thread...

 

[LEB Ben]

So if you have pics that are the size of the box, you're compliant...anything else is just courtesy?

 

[LEB Ben]

You know, that third sig size looks familiar to a 3 letter name-d person who has posted in this thread...

That's what I was wondering, because I always thought the box was for pics, thusly, I thought I was compliant. If not, I'll change it.

 

[Austin]

That's what I was wondering, because I always thought the box was for pics, thusly, I thought I was compliant. If not, I'll change it.

It never bothered me. There's always the option to turn off sigs for people that don't like looking at them.

 

[Austin]

BTW, Chris: I never could get my sigpic to work when hosted on a different site.

 

[CaFordDude]

Again let's be clear that this is just a discussion about sig sizes. This site has long strived to give users the best experience possible and that means allowing users to have their individuality. One of the ways users express that is through their sigs.

Chris has a unique perspective in that he was one of the original architects of the sig recommendation. When that original recommendation was made the sig pictures such as what he has in his sig were very popular and he was making them left and right. Some folks were making them and they were getting outrageously big which is why the recommendation came into place. At that time bandwidth was a big concern. That problem has been fixed for some time and now one of the issues we are looking at is the courtesy issue. If someone with a larger then average sig posts multiple times in a thread that may take away from another users experience because they are having to scroll through what is otherwise useless information over and over again.

If you read this post and think it is directed at you then maybe your sig is too big or you have a guilty conscience for some other atrocity you have committed I don't know but I will say this, that if there was someone's sig that I found obnoxiously big or otherwise ridiculous I would just tell you to change it.

Keep the above in mind. These are just observations on my part and that is why this is a DISCUSSION thread and not a demand for people to change things.

 

[CaFordDude]

I will say that one option I have seen on other sites that I have not seen here yet is the ability to make it so that a users sig only posts in the FIRST post they make in any given thread. That way the sig size is somewhat more lax because it is only having to be seen once per thread. I can ask admin to look into that if you guys think that option would be a good idea.

 

[LEB Ben]

^^^That's the way FSB is...and I'd imagine it would help in some of the bigger threads.

 

[CaFordDude]

Yeah I'm not sure if that is some sort of add-on to the software or just in a different version then what we are running. I will ask them to look into it.

 

[Skandocious]

To me that sounds like perhaps the best idea...

 

[6L PWR]

I will ask them to look into it.

And here they are looking into it:

 

[nobodyspecial]

I hate sig pictures due to how often I use mobile browsing.