<![CDATA[Message Boards - Boba Fett Fan Club — IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/topic/146/img-tag-in-signatures/ Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:55:58 +0000 PunBB <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/5090/#p5090 MandalorianSpy9, two lines of text.
Like this.

]]> Mon, 17 Apr 2006 23:55:58 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/5090/#p5090 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/5069/#p5069 I used to have dial-up......had it for the longest time, so i understand why it might be a bad idea. I have a question, What picture is can be squashed down to 2 lines and has low pix use?  Ive never seen one. I like the idea in general though.

                                                                    MandalorianSpy9

]]> Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:37:04 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/5069/#p5069 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2532/#p2532 Yes, you can only have two lines in your sig.

I'll consider thin images if there's already a modification available through punbb.org.

]]> Sat, 04 Mar 2006 02:03:08 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2532/#p2532 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2512/#p2512 BFFC Admin wrote:

True, but I'd also like to keep the signatures slim, so we can focus on the quality of the messages.

There isn't anything preventing the text from taking up a lot of space, is there? (I don't mean that sarcastically, but as a question...) If not, perhaps you could have a pixel size limit that includes all of the text and images in your signature.

]]> Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:57:52 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2512/#p2512 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2511/#p2511 True, but I'd also like to keep the signatures slim, so we can focus on the quality of the messages.

]]> Fri, 03 Mar 2006 21:23:58 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2511/#p2511 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2461/#p2461 Well, what I was saying was, if it was loading too slow, you could just turn off the ability to see signatures in your profile...

]]> Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:47:17 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2461/#p2461 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2460/#p2460 Yeah there are some of us who are still on dial-up and adding more graphics would slow the snail response time even more sad

]]> Fri, 03 Mar 2006 10:40:38 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2460/#p2460 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2358/#p2358 Oh.. I get it.
Hehe tongue tongue
You know what would be cool? If we had a blussing smilie.

]]> Thu, 02 Mar 2006 15:16:33 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2358/#p2358 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2353/#p2353 I think he meant that all we're going to have for the time being is avatars.

]]> Thu, 02 Mar 2006 15:07:30 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2353/#p2353 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2347/#p2347 ARC Fett wrote:

You mean that the avatars aren’t staying???!?!??!?!??!

He never said that.

]]> Thu, 02 Mar 2006 13:42:31 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2347/#p2347 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2314/#p2314 To keep the boards fast and clean, we're just experimenting with avatars for the time being.

]]> Thu, 02 Mar 2006 01:57:28 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2314/#p2314 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2201/#p2201 Yeah, and I don't really go to a lot of boards, so I probably wouldn't be the best judge of that sorta thing anyway. But I never thought of there being limits, that's a good idea.

]]> Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:29:06 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2201/#p2201 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2199/#p2199 Miba wrote:

I never liked the idea of pics in a signature, it just added too much confusion to boards, for me. But if they had a size-limit it might be ok. Just imo.

I guess it really depends on what you are used to. Most sites now adays allow it, (With some kind of limit normally) but then again, some others don't.

]]> Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:17:45 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2199/#p2199 <![CDATA[Re: IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2197/#p2197 I never liked the idea of pics in a signature, it just added too much confusion to boards, for me. But if they had a size-limit it might be ok. Just imo.

]]> Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:13:36 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2197/#p2197 <![CDATA[IMG tag in signatures?]]> http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2173/#p2173 Would it be possible and acceptable to allow the image tag in signatures? There is the possibility that people could strech the page with them, or make pages long to load, but there are simple ways to prevent that from happening. Just make a rule stating the limitations of signature images, such as file size and dimensions. And if some people on slow computers still find it loading too slow, (which they shouldn't,) they can always turn off the ability to see user signatures.

]]> Wed, 01 Mar 2006 13:24:49 +0000 http://www.bobafettfanclub.com/boards/post/2173/#p2173