Jump to content

Do You Think SF Is Too Lenient With Sigs/Avatars?


Randoman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think SF is too lenient with the Size of signatures personally but maybe that's just me

AND HOW! At my other forum, sigs cannot really exceed like 200x600 pixels. Plus, theres an automatic cut off where the forum software will cut your sig off it its too many lines. We cannot even use the spoiler tag trick there cuz yeah. Plus it cant be hella big in animated gif form. I think the cut off is about 1mb at most. Not sure actually. To be honest, i wasnt even aware some of my larger, animated sigs were breaking any rules. Not until Bal pointed it out. Hurrr.

No, it was someone else.

It may be the same person im thinking of, who had a gajillion different animated images stacked in their sig for hella days with a terrible fucking layout. Ugh...ugh!

As far as content goes, yeah this forum is the most lenient in terms of what can be actually in your sig/avatar, at least the forums i visit. My other forum, you cant have bad words in your sigs/avatars. You cant also have anything really NSFW. Scantily clad, or suggestive, maybe depending on the actual content. Its sort of a case-by-case issue though. Hard to explain. Like Esme's current sig wouldnt be allowed at that forum cuz "Mmm, dick." Even if we do agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AND HOW! At my other forum, sigs cannot really exceed like 200x600 pixels. Plus, theres an automatic cut off where the forum software will cut your sig off it its too many lines. We cannot even use the spoiler tag trick there cuz yeah. Plus it cant be hella big in animated gif form. I think the cut off is about 1mb at most. Not sure actually. To be honest, i wasnt even aware some of my larger, animated sigs were breaking any rules. Not until Bal pointed it out. Hurrr.

SF has rejected some of my images and gifs for being too large so I came to the conclusion that if it were allowed it was an acceptable size but I've been told to spoiler stuff once or twice so I guess that's not always the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, speaking of! It's past Christmas, so why are those ladies still in holiday wear?

Probably for the same reason as Shin's avatar; I guess living under a rock does have its benefits...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably for the same reason as Shin's avatar; I guess living under a rock does have its benefits...

But it wasn't a rock, it was a...

Boulder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AND HOW! At my other forum, sigs cannot really exceed like 200x600 pixels. Plus, theres an automatic cut off where the forum software will cut your sig off it its too many lines. We cannot even use the spoiler tag trick there cuz yeah. Plus it cant be hella big in animated gif form. I think the cut off is about 1mb at most. Not sure actually. To be honest, i wasnt even aware some of my larger, animated sigs were breaking any rules. Not until Bal pointed it out. Hurrr.

Actually... Spoilers stop content from being loaded before being opened, so they solve most all problems. The line limit is still an issue, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I haven't seen anything NSFW in all of my time here.

This is true.

However, I'd say that I've seen things I would rather my parents, say, not see, or random people walking behind me at college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually... Spoilers stop content from being loaded before being opened, so they solve most all problems. The line limit is still an issue, though.

Pretty sure this is incorrect.

I've seen threads with tons of images, all spoilered, that have taken a long time to load.

Also clicking the "show spoiler" before it's finished loading won't open it; you have to click it again. Or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's fair to use that kind of standard because it is too limiting. If you are concerned about that, you may want to find a way to hide the page when people come looking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure this is incorrect.

I've seen threads with tons of images, all spoilered, that have taken a long time to load.

Also clicking the "show spoiler" before it's finished loading won't open it; you have to click it again. Or something.

While that's interesting, I would need to test it... The dispay: none property in CSS stops something from being loaded by the DOM. Maybe the spoiler content isn't being hidden until after it loads? That would be a problem.

tumblr_mzd9a49Lbg1qbvovho1_500.jpg

Best-HD-Wallpaper1.jpg

hd-wallpaper-desktop-1.jpeg

3d_wallpapers_17.jpg

Edited by Makaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's fair to use that kind of standard because it is too limiting. If you are concerned about that, you may want to find a way to hide the page when people come looking.

That's why I hide sigs. I guess I'm not even using that as a standard; I did say I don't think it's too lenient earlier.

I guess it's more a partial explanation for why I hide sigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tested it. It seems only the container is hidden, defeating the purpose. Whoever coded this needs a new job.

Actually... display: none doesn't stop it from being loaded. I've been lied to all this time. Curses!

There is a way to stop them from being loaded and that is to use JavaScript (jQuery in this case) to dynamically remove the images from the DOM until the spoiler is clicked, and then add them.

Edited by Makaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...