Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

images in signatures?

Discussion in 'Suggestion Box' started by darkspec, Mar 27, 2003.


  1. darkspec

    darkspec

    Jan 2, 2003
    Cleveland Ohio
    How come you cant use the img tags in a sig? Can a admin turn that on? please? i got a really cool sig that is bass related....

    [​IMG]
     
  2. embellisher

    embellisher Holy Ghost filled Bass Player Staff Member Supporting Member

    The reason that img tags and html is disabled in signatures is because it eats up a tremendous amount of bandwidth, if you have a graphic in your signature on every one of your posts.
     
  3. Wrong Robot

    Wrong Robot Guest

    Apr 8, 2002
    That and they are annoying as hell. Little things I don't mind so much, but big blocky pictures like that one bug the hell outta me.
     
  4. bassmonkeee

    bassmonkeee Supporting Member

    Sep 13, 2000
    Decatur, GA
    All you have to do is become a supporting member, and you can use a smaller version as your avatar...
     
  5. darkspec

    darkspec

    Jan 2, 2003
    Cleveland Ohio
    Ok, kinda weird. I like sigs. And if its on a diffrent site i dont see how it takes up bandwith. Guess Ill just have to wait till i get some money to become a member.
     
  6. wulf

    wulf

    Apr 11, 2002
    Oxford, UK
    It doesn't take up bandwidth on the TB site but it does take up the bandwidth required to view on an individual machine.

    If I look at a thread, my web browser has to open a connection to download the HTML and then open a further connection for every resource referred to. That is time-consuming enough when all the connections are with the same server and the resources are kept small in size... once you start drawing in resources from external sites you've also got to add time to establish the connection with those servers - more data to download and also the chance that anyone of those servers will be unavailable at the time of the request.

    And what does that accomplish? Just that the end user can be subjected to whatever graphical signature someone else has chosen to use.

    The effect may not be very noticeable if you're privileged to be on a fast, reliable connection, but for someone with less wonderful resources, it adds to the hassle of using the site and you're more likely to lose their potential contributions than to gain anything by allowing images in the signatures.

    That's my tuppence worth, anyway ;)

    Wulf
     
  7. Not only that, have you seen TC lately? Last time i was there they had the images in Sigs and for say a thread with 3 replies it takes ages to load and the images themselves are like a page wide.. *shakes head*

    Merls
     
  8. HeavyDuty

    HeavyDuty Supporting Curmudgeon Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Jun 26, 2000
    Suburban Chicago, IL
    I *despise* images in sigs because I'm on a dialup.
     
  9. jazzbo

    jazzbo

    Aug 25, 2000
    San Francisco, CA
    Took the words out of my mouth.

    And they're pointless.
     
  10. BigBohn

    BigBohn

    Sep 29, 2001
    WPB, Florida
    Images in signatures??!? We don't need to STEEENKIN images in signatures!!
     
  11. Matt Till

    Matt Till

    Jun 1, 2002
    Edinboro, PA
    Better idea... allow us to have full length DivX videos.
     
  12. wulf

    wulf

    Apr 11, 2002
    Oxford, UK
    And what would you plan to do with full length DivX videos? My imagination started to take a look and then turned and fled, shrieking!

    :D

    Wulf
     
  13. Wrong Robot

    Wrong Robot Guest

    Apr 8, 2002
    yeah!

    how about allowing full length DivX movies but they have to be 2x2 resolution :D

    j/k
     
  14. For want of a better word, "word"
     
  15. bassmonkeee

    bassmonkeee Supporting Member

    Sep 13, 2000
    Decatur, GA
    :D
     
  16. wulf

    wulf

    Apr 11, 2002
    Oxford, UK
    If you want an expansive signature, then put in a link to your web page. It's not quite as 'in your face' as images (or streaming video :eek: ) in your sig, but you've then got a technicolour palette for nailing your colours to the mast for anyone who follows it up.

    That's why I put links in my signature, and I'm sure some of you will now not be able to resist clicking on them ;) (just like if I told you it was impossible to lick your own elbow, half the people who read this thread would probably try it... :D )

    Wulf
     
  17. Matt Till

    Matt Till

    Jun 1, 2002
    Edinboro, PA
    What's with the people who attach images to every single post they make? Are they trying to do this "images in signature" thing? Wouldn't they eventually realize it doesn't work. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Wrong Robot

    Wrong Robot Guest

    Apr 8, 2002
    That's absurd!
    *licks elbow*

    :meh:
     
  19. yoshi

    yoshi

    Jul 12, 2002
    England, London
    Yeah I know what you mean, the T*bcr*wler signitures are almost as stupid and halfwitted as most of members.

    I totally aggree with the admins' choice on no signitures (if I could use paintshop I'd make a no signiture picture, but I cant so it's text only).
     
  20. yoshi

    yoshi

    Jul 12, 2002
    England, London
    It's not! I saw a photo of a guy in a freinds FHM (male magasine) where the chosen one was photoed licking his own elbow, with his normal sized tongue, both intact/