[Tarun]

I'm not one to complain usually, but I find this a bit ridiclious. Call it a rant if you will but this is my forum issue.

Before, the signatures rules said as follows:

Msfn Rules said:

Signature Guidelines
This forum is only for signatures. Please abide by the rules set out by the main forum rules:

Images in signatures are limited to 300x100 and 80kb. If your signature goes above these guidelines it will be taken off and the member contacted via PM. Any signatures found to be attached to a thread and used as a signature host is not allowed on MSFN and will be removed.

This can also be seen here.

Also, refer to this thread

In that very thread, several moderators saw no problem with having more than one image. In fact, the rules never stated before that you are limited to one image in your signature.

Do take note of this:
Images in signatures are limited to 300x100 and 80kb.

Yes, images. More than one. In fact I still see many members and have for a LONG TIME who have more than one image in their signatures.

Why is this suddenly becoming such a huge issue? Seriously, it doesn't seem write to change the rules as well because of more than one image in a signature. The rules never stated that you could not have more than one image.

The rules now read as follows.

New Msfn rules said:

Images in signatures are limited to One image @ 300x100 and 80kb.  Flash and animated sigs are not permitted. You can enter max 4 lines of text in signature or signature image and.. Avatars are to be a maximum of 100x100 pixels. If your avatar or signature goes above these guidelines they will be taken off and the member contacted via PM. Any signatures found to be attached to a thread and used as a signature host is not allowed on MSFN and will be removed. Members with slow connection can disable other members signatures when reading posts by going to: My Control - Options - Board Settings.

It goes well beyond any logical explaination. It's not like these rules were being greatly abused with tons of images. In fact seeing two images was and still is quite common. I just recently changed my signature and it had two images in it.

Quote

Sig violation:
Plz read rules.
You are only allowed a 300x100 image and 4 lines of text.
Plz remove one of your imgs.
Thankx

In reply, and I'll bold the key point here:

Tarun said:

I have read over the rules, and I don't see anything saying you are limited to one image per signature. Limits to the text, yes. Images, not that I can see. In fact just trying to read over the rule it goes in circles.

I also believe a similar issue has been addressed. Please refer to this thread

Actually, the M82 sniper rifle isn't supposed to be there anyways. I saved it without that image tag, no idea how it got back in.

In reply to my message is as follows:

Quote

Thank you for the cooperation.
Rules have been modified to clarify this issue
Thankx

In the new rules, did anyone notice how it still says at the beginning "images"? The rules are still quite off. How can you have images when it says one? Then again I could very well be acting critical on this. But why should members get in trouble over this now when others -including many moderators- have not seen any issue with this?

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, nor am I blaming anyone. I see this as an issue that needs to be clarified and resolved.

Perhaps this is just me; but does anyone else see something totally wrong with the rules being changed because of two images in a signature? I certainly do.

Best regards,
Tarun

[gamehead200]

We're starting to enforce the new rules. You will see many changes in the next few days... Also, your signature is a little too big, mind fixing it?

However, I agree with you, Tarun. I feel that as long as the width and height of all images in your signature add up to 300x100 pixels, then you should be not breaking any rules. I will discuss it with the other mods and hopefully we will come to a final decision.

[Tarun]

gamehead200, on Dec 9 2004, 06:58 PM, said:

We're starting to enforce the new rules.  You will see many changes in the next few days...  Also, your signature is a little too big, mind fixing it?

I was told this via Private Message. If need be I will forward the PM.

Quote

You are only allowed a 300x300 image and 4 lines of text.

The image is a site logo, linked offsite to my website. 240x110. It is in accordance to what I was told via PM. As per the rules, yes the image is over.. by 10 pixels in the height. Would that be such an extreme issue? I would think not, I would believe there would be some leeway.

I just not really noticed, but I had an M82 sniper rifle that was an animated gif. Nothing was said for all the months I used it. Not one word. Just little things I find very interesting.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or chew anyone out, I'm just really confused by all this.

These conflicting issues need to be resolved. :\

Perhaps a full rewrite of the rules is in order?

[Synapse]

I've had my 2 image Sig for about 2 months now. no one ever said anything about it. I would've appreciated a PM from a Mod telling me to change it before changing my Sig to "Sig Removed. Plz read rules"

Also, I think the Rules should've been updated and then "bumped" so taht people would see the new rules insted of just putting "Updated: December 9th" I know the rules, i don't check the rules every day. I read the rules about 3 times when i put up 2 images in my sig to make sure i didn't violate any rules.

On my original Bi0haZarD Sig i had before it was 30 pixels too wide. i even resized it down so that i wouldn't be breaking the rules.

[Tarun]

Bi0haZarD, on Dec 9 2004, 07:31 PM, said:

Also, I think the Rules should've been updated and then "bumped" so taht people would see the new rules insted of just putting "Updated: December 9th" I know the rules, i don't check the rules every day. I read the rules about 3 times when i put up 2 images in my sig to make sure i didn't violate any rules.

I concur. I also read over the rules many, MANY times when I just recently updated my signature to be sure that nothing was breaking the rules. From what I read, nothing was violating the rules.

Until today. Kind of gives you that feeling like someone's out to get you cause they're having a bad day or God knows what.

Also Gamehead, not to single you out, but I believe your signature is now in violation of the new rules too. Just because of those tiny little images at the bottom of your sig. I now see why you said the following:

gamehead200 said:

I feel that as long as the width and height of all images in your signature add up to 300x100 pixels, then you should be not breaking any rules.

Slick dude!

I do feel this issue is extremely out of hand and I, along with many others I'm sure, do not appreciate this. Makes you start to think about finding another website to frequent.

[gamehead200]

Tarun said:

Also Gamehead, not to single you out, but I believe your signature is now in violation of the new rules too.  Just because of those tiny little images at the bottom of your sig.

I know... It will be dealt with in the next few days until we get these rules straightened out.

Tarun said:

Slick dude! 

That's what they call me at school!

[SiMoNsAyS]

Quote

Also Gamehead, not to single you out, but I believe your signature is now in violation of the new rules too.  Just because of those tiny little images at the bottom of your sig.

i built mine based on his

i started using a 500x100 signature but i decided to change it a few months ago just to be picky with the current rules.

i personally don't mind to see anything smaller than 600x200, i can understand that some people don't like them because they fill their lowbands with stupids jpgs.
the thing is just apply common sense, if you don't use anything annoying i'm sure admins won't have a problem

[Tarun]

I found it so strange after all this time, when I update my sig I get a PM about it when -as stated in the first post- I saw no violations.

[SiMoNsAyS]

maybe it was another thing, not the image itself... perhaps because it promots other website dunno. pm'ing the admin is the best solution

[Drewdatrip]

Dear all,
The rules have been modified as of the 9th of december due to new, as well as many old members exploiting the previous rules in place.
Previosly the rules limited the resolution but was not specific in regards to allowing or disallowing multiple images.
When the rules were made we(MSFN staff) infered this, however made the mistake of not stating t flat out.

All modifications have been made to make the experince of our users a more pleasnt one. Post have been increasing long with very little content due to the utter hugeness of the signatures.
In addition to this Page loads are always an issue for us and we wish to respect all forms of internet speeds..Keeping the images small and optimized will benifit everyone.

Curent standing rules:

Quote

5. Images in signatures shall NOT exceed a total of 300x100 and 80kb. Flash and animated sigs are not permitted. You can enter max 4 lines of text in signature or signature image.. Avatars are to be a maximum of 100x100 pixels. If your avatar or signature goes above these guidelines they will be taken off and the member contacted via PM. Any signatures found to be attached to a thread and used as a signature host is not allowed on MSFN and will be removed. Members with slow connection can disable other members signatures when reading posts by going to: My Control - Options - Board Settings.

@Tarun
In regards to the PMs i made a typo and stated the sig limitations to 300x300 however I ment 300x100. In the future just refer to the writin rules, however i do applogies for my slip up.


In reagards to mods in violation, this has been correct as of today.

Warning will be pmed in regards to multiple images or animated images.
However if said user violates the previous limitation of 300x100. Image will be removed.
I understand that the new modifcation to the rules will take time to be fully instated. However the 300x100 have been in place for many many months. WE have been very forgiving inregards to this, but it is simply getting out of hand.

Thank you everyone for all your understanding.

|Drew|

[Tarun]

SiMoNsAyS said:

maybe it was another thing, not the image itself... perhaps because it promots other website dunno. pm'ing the admin is the best solution

The images were a firing M82 sniper rifle seen here and of course my current signature.

Now, explain to me how two images in a signature that are not excessive in file size or pixels h x w can be problematic when hosted offsite?

DrewDaTrip said:

In addition to this Page loads are always an issue for us and we wish to respect all forms of internet speeds..Keeping the images small and optimized will benifit everyone.

So two small images take up THAT much bandwidth? Interesting, and when hosted offsite too. Let me just say this in closing.

I first came here under 28.8k speeds and I could handle animated sigs with two or more images in the sigs just fine. Yes, that's right. On DIALUP at 28.8kbps. This leads me to believe that the above quote has no validity in that very sense.

Here's another thing. I'm not singling you guys out, but this is a prime example; be it a form of discrimination or simply being biased. Why was Simonsays sig changed, and not Gameheads sig? Is it because Gamehead is a mod and Simonsays is a member?

The rules need a serious overhaul, this much is becoming more and more apparent. I wouldn't be surprised if some people start to boycott this site. :\

[Wraith]

I have a feeling that the issue of sigs being modified without notice has changed - you may have been one of the first few people to have it done.

That policy seems to have changed, as I was PM'ed rather than have it modified on me.

[Tarun]

Wraith, on Dec 9 2004, 11:09 PM, said:

I have a feeling that the issue of sigs being modified without notice has changed - you may have been one of the first few people to have it done.

That policy seems to have changed, as I was PM'ed rather than have it modified on me.

I too received a PM; however, after receiving the PM I checked the rules and guess what? Much like in my original post it did not say using more than one image was against the rules. In fact, the rules were changed AFTER I had REPLIED to the PM. Something seem a bit wrong with that anyone? Sure seems like it to me. :\

[Synapse]

@Wraith mine was just changed, No PM nothin... luckily i still got the link lol. I see that as kinda rude didn't give me a chance to change it myself... but i do see it somewhat allowed since PMin everyone would be a big pain.. insted the rules topic should've been changed and bumped so everyone could see the new rule and adjust to it.. insted of just going around removing peoples sigs.

[Alanoll]

I would have to agree with the rules bumping...
I just found out about the rule change myself..

And don't feel too bad guys, my sig was removed as well, and it was pure text. and I didn't get a PM either, but I don't really care. My sig was maybe 5 lines on my screen, but I have no idea how large it was on others.

Quote

Now, explain to me how two images in a signature that are not excessive in file size or pixels h x w can be problematic when hosted offsite?

I don't think the issue is really of the image hosting, but infact the loading times. But then again, what about those rather large screenshots I see?

I'm personally not infavor of any sort of limiting of the signature, but I will enforce the rules as I interpret them starting with myself.

Quote

Here's another thing. I'm not singling you guys out, but this is a prime example; be it a form of discrimination or simply being biased. Why was Simonsays sig changed, and not Gameheads sig? Is it because Gamehead is a mod and Simonsays is a member?

I honestly can't answer that. But like I said, mine was changed as was prathapml's. Perhaps it just wasn't Gamehead's turn. I dunno.

I wonder what new rules will come into affect.....
I just hope next time, there might be a grace period or something instead of an abrupt change.

[Wraith]

Not entirely sure about the loading times theory - my sig image was never more than about 5kB... well, that was before I had to change the size, and decided that I may as well throw a background image in.

I do admit that my sig could get out of hand at certain points - I think I had it around 1500px wide at once point, due to song titles. Silly me.

Capped at 300x80 now.

[Drewdatrip]

I thought my previous post would clarify these issues but by the looks of it, either people are simply not reading what i have stated, dont understand or i myself am not being clear.
Once again i wish to explain the situation:
Pms were issued to the individuals of those who were in violation of the new rule, IE images shall not exceed a total of 300x100 or 80k in total

The remander of people that had their sigs removed was due to a dirrect violation of a rule that has been in place for several months.
In this i refer directly to many of the people that have posted here.

I understand that it may of seem ubrupt, however the policy that enforced a limitation to sig images to 300x100 have been around for a long time, it just so happend that at the time of the sig rule modifcation is when we decided to crack down on the violations.

Many of you are saying "Well what gives? its just a few Kbs or a few extra lines on the page!"
Well lets just make up a hypothetical situation in which lets say per page ther are roughly 10 posts of 8 unique posters and each of them are in violation of 2lines of extra text and each only 5-15kb per sig.
SO with the established of 8unique images a personal would be loading an additional 40-120k on top of the already give 640-760k of assumed data of signatures.
Lets assume the user is on a 56k modem and averages 5-10kbs. Just to load the image on page this particualr user could end up waiting an wait roughly 1 to 2 mins.
PER PAGE
This is completly negating the loading time of the forums other components.

From a users stand point trying to find an answer and having to wait several minuts between page loads, is more then frustrating...to put it int he simplest of terms, it pushes a large portion or our community away.
And that is the very last thing I and MSFN wants.
WE are a community that relies on the individuals to show up and become avid posters. With more members come more answers and more questions...and we all benifit from it in the end casue we have come out of the situation more educated.

IF i have I or MSFN has offended you..appologies all around..
just know it was never personal.....rules must be in place to keep the community in order...and with that rules must be enforced.
If your sig was removed you know why.
Yes we have been very lax about this in the past, but there comes a time where it gets out of control, and as our community expands, WE wish to maintain a professional and freindly look. These modifcations and enforcment of the rules are with the user inmind....noone else. They are to aid in making sure people can find what they are looking for in a timly fashion.

I hope this clarifies all that has been discussed
Thank you for your time.
IF you have any further question feel free to PM me

THankx

|Drew|

[Wraith]

Just a Q, is there a possibility for turning off sigs on all new accounts by default?

If loading such an amount of data (overestimated, in my opinion) is a problem, then switch them off.

This page currently with 16 posts comes out at 82kB, cached images from the MSFN site come out at nearly ~100kB, and avatars/sigs end up at ~160kB... so 340kB. Much lower than just the "640-760k of assumed data of signatures". Admittedly there is only 5 unique signatures in this thread, but 8 uniques would still mean ~260kB.
In fact, it'd be a much smaller if gamehead200 would move off jpg and onto png

I'm not trying to attack you, nor am I trying to get the rule abolished or anything, in fact I think it's quite a valid one.
Just making the facts known, and providing a suggestion.

[Drewdatrip]

Wraith-
Keep in mind that the majority of the posts within this thread follow the rules that we have established.
I was refering to a situation inwhich sigs were 5-15k larger then what are stated in the rules.

Beyond the issue of load time plz do not negate the fact that large and bulky sigs just create cluter and fluff and give a site an unprofessional look. which is the exact oposite were going for here...right?

|Drew|

[Doggie]

I'll have a little rant and hopefully it will stay in everybodys memory. Not only does this rule help users on slow connections but reduces loading time on threads. Signatures should be 300 x 100 and not exceed 80kb in size. I'd like to think if found that you have broken this rule, me myself will Private Message you saying can you please making your signature to the current rules or remove all together, and if within 7 days of message and still nothing done then i will have no choice but to remove your signature altogether and send you another private message what and why it happened, all we seem to be doing here is arguing about the rules over and over. So in saying that, this thread is closed and end of issue, understand why we are now enforcing the rules