Why 60X60?

[elite28]

I think the 60 pixel by 60 pixel limit is to small cause to avatars are to small to see. the limit should be something like 105x150 or 200x200.

[amzng_spyderman]

60X60 is fine for dial up users like me. speaking of avatars, yours needs to be changed. you can't swear in it.

[Bigshot]

what does the avatar do besids the fact that you don't have to read their name. just memorize their avatar with their name. We are luckie to have them at all. they could be taken away just like pics in sigs

[clown_13_2001]

Originally posted by Bigshot
what does the avatar do besids the fact that you don't have to read their name. just memorize their avatar with their name. We are luckie to have them at all. they could be taken away just like pics in sigs

I hate pic sigs with a passion.:)

[.:{}:.]

i would want a 100x100. i got an avatar thats too big, but its awesome.

[PBfreak01]

Bandwith, my friends, it's all about bandwith. Andrew pays for this stuff out of his pocket.

[PMI_Guy]

Any bigger than about 70X70 and the frames start looking messy. :yuck:

[Someday1189]

http://www.asmallvictory.net/archives/burninator.jpg

trogdor the burninator begs to differhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v695/lri2x97/minirastadodgy.gif

[toolbandfan]

A certain couple of members had a huge avatar, one was a pink elephant. The other was UTLadiesMan with a huge sheep.

[noz]

60x60 is ok for avatars. However img tags in sigs would be nice. We'd have to use our own hosting, so no extra bandwidth usage. People with dial-up or who just dislike them could just turn them off in their cp.

[OWNAGE]

Originally posted by noz
60x60 is ok for avatars. However img tags in sigs would be nice. We'd have to use our own hosting, so no extra bandwidth usage. People with dial-up or who just dislike them could just turn them off in their cp.
Except when sigs take up half the page.

[Someday1189]

Originally posted by noz
People with dial-up or who just dislike them could just turn them off in their cp.

[amzng_spyderman]

screw that. i recognize most of the people here by their avatars, and i'm not about to turn them off. plus, i'm a mod, so i have to view all sigs and avy's to make sure they're legal.

stay with 60X60.

[TiPpYsGaLoRe]

Look at IromKnight's profile. That's why we don't have huge avys.

[noz]

Originally posted by SpyderOWNAGE

Except when sigs take up half the page.

you could put some limit size, like 400x150 or so, but I believe their is no 'automatic' way of doing that, so it would give the mods additional trouble I guess.

[OWNAGE]

Originally posted by noz


you could put some limit size, like 400x150 or so, but I believe their is no 'automatic' way of doing that, so it would give the mods additional trouble I guess.
I'm talking about every member who posts, not just one member.

400x150 times about 10 post (under-estimating) per page. That's 1500 pixels used (height-wise) up right there.

[noz]

as far as I'm concerned, it's tolerable. But I guess not everyone thinks so. And I run 1280x960 on a 17in monitor. I see how it could get really annoying if you run 800x600 or something. But then again as I mentioned above, vB includes an option in people's CP to disable seeing of signature images (or was that only whole signatures?)

I checked it out, and it seems it's only whole sigs, so I guess that's a problem if you want to see sigs but no images :\

[ShadowWalker]

Originally posted by SpyderOWNAGE

I'm talking about every member who posts, not just one member.

400x150 times about 10 post (under-estimating) per page. That's 1500 pixels used (height-wise) up right there.

But sigs now don't take up a huge amount of space? 150 pixels tall isn't that much really. You would have to make it "x" amount of text or 400x150 or something. If you did that it wouldn't take up any more space than current sigs, andwould probably take up less space depending on the person's current sig.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/shadowwalker590/450x150.jpg
smaller than my current sig

[Avery_mac]

pics in sig , holy crap it is so distracting

it is the worst thing a forum can ever do ,

first people will have to big of pictures , then people will have affencive pictures

then i get mad . and they get banned

[GranDream]

A vote for pics in sigs is a vote against people using 56k connections.

[TiPpYsGaLoRe]

Originally posted by GranDream
A vote for pics in sigs is a vote against people using 56k connections.

QFT

[Someday1189]

cable rockshttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v695/lri2x97/minirastadodgy.gif

[PMI_Guy]

No pics in sigs.


Please.