Well in the other thread it was quite obvious we have one thing missing from signature rules, Text size and lines of text, and how many etc.

 

 

 

It was obvious that mods will just use their judgement on what they deem appropriate at the time, but i think to stop further arguments happening, we could set clear rules for how many lines of text we can have in signatures, how many lines combined with an image etc.

 

 

 

To sum up (i waffle on alot): Can we set some clear rules for how many lines of text we can have, size of text and text size combined with images etc.

I would love to have an official rule. But the problem is how many lines of text do we allow? I mean you could say "Four lines of text in addition to an image with a height of 200 pixels." But then what about when people use larger or smaller text sizes? And what if their image isn't 200 pixels high? We could specify the amount of "pixels worth of text" you could have, but that would require moderators to take a ton of screenshots of every single signature that could potentially be oversized. While possible, it does get tedious.

We're discussing it, a definitive solution should be up soon.

I cast my vote for total pixel size...

It's for the mods and admins to decide.

Yep, just throwing it out there. The only problem is how that's measured; it can be skewed either way, but I'd go with bottom and top most pixel; leaving it open to interpretation is generally a bad idea.

I think overall pixel size would be the best route here. Just my opinion though ;)

~removed

 

 

 

Is his siggy over the limit?

 

 

 

I don't want to send a report if I am wrong.

Please don't post profiles of users with potentially bad signatures. Instead just pm a moderator, or report it anyway, if the mod who gets the report thinks it's fine, they will just close it, you won't get banned or anything for false reporting.

And yet people say all the time who was µ glitching and its ok :roll:

 

 

 

Just waiting for an official limit.

And yet people say all the time who was µ glitching and its ok :roll:

 

 

 

Just waiting for an official limit.

 

Naming players in a negative light is never acceptable. If you see it being done, please report it and we will take care of it.

Just remove signatures completely if people don't like them.

Just remove signatures completely if people don't like them.

 

Honestly, if they're this much of a problem, why not?

Just remove signatures completely if people don't like them.

 

Honestly, if they're this much of a problem, why not?

 

 

 

Because my epic siggy will have to go! :cry: In reality though, I don't think the majority of people would like that rule.

 

Honestly, if they're this much of a problem, why not?

 

Yes, forcing the moderators to decide on a pixel limit is REALLY a drastic problem. Eliminate the signatures, lest the moderators have to pick a size! To the town square with torches, my friends!

 

 

 

No. No. No. I use signatures to identify people, and it's a nice trademark to leave on a post. I associate different people's signatures with different levels of maturity, intelligence, and detail. It's also a great means of creative expression (tripsis), or communication your RS levels to people at a glance so they don't have to dig into the RS high scores every time they want to see your skills.

I think the sarcasm went over your head slightly.

Went right over mine too, i thought they were being serious.

"To the town square with torches, my friends!"

 

That's sarcasm.

 

 

 

 

 

"Just remove signatures completely if people don't like them. Honestly, if they're this much of a problem, why not?"

 

I'm really not detecting sarcasm here. I hope for dsavi and jem's sake that it was, but we won't know until they return to tell us.

Nah I was being half serious. I wouldn't want them to go but if people are stressing so much and getting ulcurs over it then might as well remove them.

Same here. I have never seen such a big fuss made over something like this on FU&S before. It was really beginning to go overboard before the other thread was locked.

Technically, only one user is making a big fuss. :P

I didn't actually specify who was making said fuss... :| Yeah, I agree that it wasn't exactly the moderators putting gasoline on the fire.

It shouldn't matter who was making a fuss. It shows that there is a problem (albeit a small one) with the fine rules, a small change to the rules can save alot of hastle in the future.

Technically, only one user is making a big fuss. :P

 

:-w :-w :-w

 

 

 

Meh, I just don't like having my signature banned while half a dozen other users with visibly larger signatures have no action whatsoever taken against them. I don't like being given the run around by moderators who won't give me a straight answer.

 

 

 

But I won't change this thread in that direction. I swear I won't :-#

Technically, only one user is making a big fuss. :P

 

:-w :-w :-w

 

 

 

Meh, I just don't like having my signature banned while half a dozen other users with visibly larger signatures have no action whatsoever taken against them. I don't like being given the run around by moderators who won't give me a straight answer.

 

 

 

But I won't change this thread in that direction. I swear I won't :-#

 

 

 

Well, its good that it has been brought to the attention of the mods, hopefully the guidelines will be made clearer/standardized soon :)