Sigs

NearHi · 04-21-2010, 01:33 AM

Is there an iota of a chance that we can "upgrade" and get slightly bigger sigs again?
Maybe, possibly even allow Flash sigs again?

Slime · 04-21-2010, 01:46 AM

the answer is no
-goat

Trooper · 04-21-2010, 04:59 PM

the answer is no
-lohr

Roadkill Dave · 04-21-2010, 05:10 PM

the answer is blowin' in the wind
-led zeplin

Lord Blazer · 04-21-2010, 05:30 PM

I'd be down with 100x100 avs and
545x100 sigs

Trooper · 04-21-2010, 05:45 PM

Maybe sigs that cover the full width of a post?

Dave Miles · 04-21-2010, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadkill Dave

the answer is blowin' in the wind
-led zeplin

-Bob Dylanski

AR-Raven · 04-21-2010, 08:21 PM

no. the sigs now are nice. larger sigs are nasty. flash sigs would be the end of the world. Trooper, as usual, doesn't understand how the internet works.

Nixon · 04-21-2010, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AR-Raven

no. the sigs now are terrible. larger sigs are needed. flash sigs would be the end to this nightmare. Trooper, as usual,understands alot more than me about how the internet works, good job!

looks like ar-raven is onboard with this whole idea

AR-Raven · 04-21-2010, 09:17 PM

kill me

Nixon · 04-21-2010, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AR-Raven

kill me

with pleasure

Slime · 04-21-2010, 09:25 PM

Members, please refrain from posting your every whim in Administrative Contact. This forum is reserved for serious discussion only.

-Goat

Space Goat · 04-21-2010, 11:24 PM

- this is the first thread where I agree with something AR-Raven said. I guess that means I must be wrong on this issue.

In all seriousness, I went through absolute hell to get everyone's signatures uniform the way they are now, and I don't want to do that all over again. Besides, I feel they are already a really nice fit and find myself tending to resist any change here.

I can't even allow you to embed flash in your posts (let alone your signatures) because of all the xss security vulnerabilities that would open up. I think I allowed it in the very beginning, and Travis found a way to harvest the MD5 hash for virtually everyone's password with it. Bad idea.

If you're wondering why youtube is allowed, well that's different, because with those I can enforce that it's loading from a trusted source (i.e. youtube.com).

Bown · 04-21-2010, 11:33 PM

realistically the av and sig limits are far, far too tiny but i just don't find myself caring that much. it's been this way ever since i joined, it's just how 3dmm is for me

Slime · 04-22-2010, 01:24 AM

The limit is pretty small, but its pretty neat how you have to just do what you can with the tiny space provided. I think I like it like this

AR-Raven · 04-22-2010, 01:54 AM

I don't think it's tiny at all, it's plenty of room. Larger sigs just look so bad, especially with randomly sized huge ones and shitty images all over the place. Forums are mostly about text, having it broken up with huge, stupid images that some 12 year old like bill nickson thinks looks cool because he found a filer in photoshop make forums a terrible place.

NearHi · 04-22-2010, 04:15 AM

Ah. Well the Flash makes sense. I thought you were doing out of preference.

As for size, I think they are small, now because of advancements in screen resolution and such. Back when this version of the board started it was fine, but now it just seems restricted.

Bown · 04-22-2010, 07:38 AM

I was referring more to avatars when I mentioned the size btw, I forgot this thread was specifically about sigs

Bown · 04-22-2010, 07:40 AM

I mean fuck, why would ANYONE ever want a flash sig? They're the worst things in the world

NearHi · 04-22-2010, 09:07 AM

I think it'd be kinda fun to have an interactive sig and Flash would be pretty much the only thing to match that.

Trooper · 04-22-2010, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AR-Raven

no. the sigs now are nice. larger sigs are nasty. flash sigs would be the end of the world. Trooper, as usual, doesn't understand how the internet works.

Ahaha wtf? Goat allows a width of 325 pixels on a sig, so I suggested changing it to cover pretty much the full width of a standard post. How is that a misunderstanding of how the internet works? Goat's choice of signature width has fuck all to do with how the internet works.

You might be referring to when people post an image that is wider than the page, in which case the page becomes wider, but that hardly ever happens on here.

Phil Williamson · 04-22-2010, 01:39 PM

I think he's referring to the potential exploits flash sigs would allow

Trooper · 04-22-2010, 01:40 PM

I don't think so. I never mentioned flash sigs.

Bown · 04-22-2010, 04:10 PM

i think he was referring to "large sigs are nasty" and how anyone who wants bigger sigs is doing the internet wrong (look at other forums where they allow big sigs)

Cubert · 04-22-2010, 04:12 PM

i think he was just name-dropping trooper because he figured he could get away with it

04-21-2010, 01:33 AM	#1
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483	Sigs Is there an iota of a chance that we can "upgrade" and get slightly bigger sigs again? Maybe, possibly even allow Flash sigs again?
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483

04-21-2010, 01:46 AM	#2
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	the answer is no -goat
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

04-21-2010, 04:59 PM	#3
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441	the answer is no -lohr
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441

04-21-2010, 05:45 PM	#6
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441	Maybe sigs that cover the full width of a post?
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441

04-21-2010, 08:21 PM	#8
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558	no. the sigs now are nice. larger sigs are nasty. flash sigs would be the end of the world. Trooper, as usual, doesn't understand how the internet works.
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558

04-21-2010, 05:10 PM	#4
Roadkill Dave Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 2,458	the answer is blowin' in the wind -led zeplin

04-21-2010, 05:30 PM	#5
Lord Blazer Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 16,879	I'd be down with 100x100 avs and 545x100 sigs

04-21-2010, 09:17 PM	#10
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558	kill me
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558

04-21-2010, 09:25 PM	#12
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	Members, please refrain from posting your every whim in Administrative Contact. This forum is reserved for serious discussion only. -Goat
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

04-21-2010, 11:24 PM	#13
Space Goat Administrator Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 6,042	- this is the first thread where I agree with something AR-Raven said. I guess that means I must be wrong on this issue. In all seriousness, I went through absolute hell to get everyone's signatures uniform the way they are now, and I don't want to do that all over again. Besides, I feel they are already a really nice fit and find myself tending to resist any change here. I can't even allow you to embed flash in your posts (let alone your signatures) because of all the xss security vulnerabilities that would open up. I think I allowed it in the very beginning, and Travis found a way to harvest the MD5 hash for virtually everyone's password with it. Bad idea. If you're wondering why youtube is allowed, well that's different, because with those I can enforce that it's loading from a trusted source (i.e. youtube.com).

04-21-2010, 11:33 PM	#14
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740	realistically the av and sig limits are far, far too tiny but i just don't find myself caring that much. it's been this way ever since i joined, it's just how 3dmm is for me
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740

04-22-2010, 01:24 AM	#15
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	The limit is pretty small, but its pretty neat how you have to just do what you can with the tiny space provided. I think I like it like this
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

04-22-2010, 01:54 AM	#16
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558	I don't think it's tiny at all, it's plenty of room. Larger sigs just look so bad, especially with randomly sized huge ones and shitty images all over the place. Forums are mostly about text, having it broken up with huge, stupid images that some 12 year old like bill nickson thinks looks cool because he found a filer in photoshop make forums a terrible place.
AR-Raven Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,558

04-22-2010, 04:15 AM	#17
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483	Ah. Well the Flash makes sense. I thought you were doing out of preference. As for size, I think they are small, now because of advancements in screen resolution and such. Back when this version of the board started it was fine, but now it just seems restricted.
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483

04-22-2010, 07:38 AM	#18
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740	I was referring more to avatars when I mentioned the size btw, I forgot this thread was specifically about sigs
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740

04-22-2010, 07:40 AM	#19
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740	I mean fuck, why would ANYONE ever want a flash sig? They're the worst things in the world
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740

04-22-2010, 09:07 AM	#20
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483	I think it'd be kinda fun to have an interactive sig and Flash would be pretty much the only thing to match that.
NearHi Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,483

04-22-2010, 01:39 PM	#22
Phil Williamson Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 16,900	I think he's referring to the potential exploits flash sigs would allow

04-22-2010, 01:40 PM	#23
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441	I don't think so. I never mentioned flash sigs.
Trooper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,441

04-22-2010, 04:10 PM	#24
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740	i think he was referring to "large sigs are nasty" and how anyone who wants bigger sigs is doing the internet wrong (look at other forums where they allow big sigs)
Bown Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 18,740

04-22-2010, 04:12 PM	#25
Cubert Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,990	i think he was just name-dropping trooper because he figured he could get away with it
Cubert Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,990