Controlling Signature Bloat

Thanks Model Museum and Dwight, though it was more of an open question to one of the moderators... I was hoping they could reach into their bag of tricks and pull something out.

No dice yet, but we'll give it some time.

QUOTE: Originally posted by rjkplasticmod Tom, when you get the B-26 done, post some pix. Just hope it doesn't rain before you finish it . Regards, Rick

it's rained for the last 9 hours straight... so much for innovation... I was even thinking of making it a flying replica!

And turn it on...


(because I like having mine and seeing those of others...)

QUOTE: Originally posted by ckfredrickson I normally leave the sigs off, but how about a compromise.... I've noticed that if a member responds multiple times to the same post/thread, his signature also gets reposted every time. Is there a way so that it is only displayed once (i.e. at the bottom of an author's first response or the bottom of the author's most recent response)... is there really a need to show an author's sig multiple times within the same thread?

You are correct, the poster has the option to include (or not) his sig each time he posts. It is in Options: (under the message window of the Post a New Reply page).

As an example, I'll turn my sig off.

QUOTE: Originally posted by ckfredrickson Is there a way so that it is only displayed once (i.e. at the bottom of an author's first response or the bottom of the author's most recent response)... is there really a need to show an author's sig multiple times within the same thread?

It could be done, but I think it would some nifty programming to do so.

I think the sig is simply appended to any post made by a forum member.

I normally leave the sigs off, but how about a compromise....

I've noticed that if a member responds multiple times to the same post/thread, his signature also gets reposted every time.

Is there a way so that it is only displayed once (i.e. at the bottom of an author's first response or the bottom of the author's most recent response)... is there really a need to show an author's sig multiple times within the same thread?

Well, it's about time that you drop by, Dave. Actually I prefer your picture in a 500x500 dimensions. LOL. Just kidding.

500x200 is fine anyway the site automatically resizes the pic into a sort of a thumbnail with a maximum width of 350 pixels, right?

How about the size in kB?

I think 500x100 is perfect this allows us to post 5 100x100 Thumbnails in a panaroma style image. Irfanview can do that.

FYI, Irfanview is a FREE program and I can send the few needed steps to create such an image to interested peope. Honestly takes less than 90 seconds to set up such an image

For anyone asking about guidelines for images, here are two images you can use for reference.

500 x 200
This first one is 500px wide x 200px high. The space taken up by this image is really the most a signature should take up. This is actually quite generous compared to other forums I go to.

500 x 100
This second one is 500px wide x 100px high. The space taken up by this image is ideal for a signature (or smaller is fine too).



What do you think? Would this be acceptable?

Wow. I don't know where to begin on this one. I only work an 8 hour day here.

Seriously, no one likes to be the "Enforcer". Enforcing rules is a thankless and tiring responsibility.

Here's my personal observation. I haven't been keeping up with the forums lately (still have been on the site), but checking out some of the forums, I have to say some of the signatures are out of hand. [:0]

Personally, I would like to see tighter rules/restrictions/guidelines (whatever you want to call it) placed on signatures. It has gotten a bit out of hand in some instances. While that's my personal view, I'm not about to be the one responsible for making a policy that will most likely make some unhappy and even leave. I've been involved in many forums, not just for what I do here, but in my own private time. I know how important individual expression and signatures are for people.

The problem is that many people don't understand how to crop and resize images, nor do they understand file sizes and how it impacts other people. So while rules are great, I think educating people would be a better solution. Granted, we don't have the time nor resources to do a one on one with each new member. Hopefully in the next version of the forums, we'll have some tools built-in that will make it easier for members to include smaller images in their signatures.

In the meantime, if you see someone with a super-sized image and you're pretty handy with images, consider offering to crop the image for that person. With all the digital cameras out there, it's easy to take the picture and upload the image to the web. Very few people realize these pictures should be cropped/resized before posting.

Tom, when you get the B-26 done, post some pix. Just hope it doesn't rain before you finish it .

Regards, Rick

yeah I noticed it too... we all make mistakes... he's a nice guy, wouldn't have done it on purpose...

yup, a nice email explaining the situation, and if they get upset with ya complain to the mods... I hate rules... if they cap the pic size I'll never get a good shot of the 1/2 B-26 Marauder I am building in my yard with empty toilet paper rolls!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Captain Caveman ive just seen one by Armorman. it take the P**s http://www.finescale.com/fsm/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=29690 I dont want to turn off my sigs but having 6 large photos of a plane being built is going too far here are the photos in his sig the other ones in there are ok with me and a list of what hes going to make "Gee, sir, I was thinking them depleted uranium shells would speed his journey to his maker; so I fired a lot of 'em! " *Shelved: Tamiya 1/48 P-47 Bubbletop Esci 1/72 F-35 JSF Monogram 1/48 F-15E Revell-Monogram 1/48 F-14D Academy 1/48 F-14A *On the Bench: Hasegawa 1/72 F-18E Super Bug

i posted the above post just becouse it took the page up when they where loading, and it P***ed me off, i have nothing against Armorman, i dont think ive seen him on the boards before
Armorman has removed the photos from his sig
it didnt make sence to put them in his sig so it might have been as tho9900 said that it was a mistake

QUOTE: Originally posted by zokissima See, now how can you make a valid argument that sigs should be left as is. Don't you think that the above case is just too excessive. I can concede the in-progress lists, as it is just text, but 6 UNCROPPED FULL images?!? Isn't that just going too far. If anything, at least learn how to use a scanner properly, and crop and resize. This isn't rocket science. Tell me something, if we find someone like this, would it not be prudent to at least tell them that this is a form of excess? Or should we just leave them be? See my problem is, I don't WANT to turn off sigs, I DO want to see works in progress in form of lists and links to good sites, but I don't want to see the above. How about a data-size cap on sigs. Something like 100k. That would be decent enough for some text and a few small, reasonably sized images.

ahhh see here is where I agree with you... what I see is a lack of knowledge of posting pics... I know where those pics came from and it was from a group build question... instead of posting them in the message he mistakenly put them in his sig... I agree... post to him explain how to do it right!! email him.. again, explain... but to cap the sigs... to get rid of the sigs is throwing the baby out with the bath as mentioned by someone else earlier...

this should be a self-policing thing... in fact I was going to mention something to the individual... not out of exasperation... but out of concern for others on dial up etc... personally it doesnt bother me that bad....

So yes.,. there is a median...

just my opinion... caps and rules ring of an arbitrary system where pics of a new build might be less clear because of the cap... rules... that takes the freedom out of the internet... we can self police ourselves and be fine. most here are a fine bunch and wont be upset... If someone tells me my sig is bad... yeah I might get my feelings hurt.. but hey, its not the first time I'll get over it... maybe a email so it's private... something open on the forum might not be recieved as well...

See, now how can you make a valid argument that sigs should be left as is.
Don't you think that the above case is just too excessive. I can concede the in-progress lists, as it is just text, but 6 UNCROPPED FULL images?!? Isn't that just going too far. If anything, at least learn how to use a scanner properly, and crop and resize. This isn't rocket science.
Tell me something, if we find someone like this, would it not be prudent to at least tell them that this is a form of excess? Or should we just leave them be?
See my problem is, I don't WANT to turn off sigs, I DO want to see works in progress in form of lists and links to good sites, but I don't want to see the above.
How about a data-size cap on sigs. Something like 100k. That would be decent enough for some text and a few small, reasonably sized images.

ive just seen one by Armorman. it take the P**s

http://www.finescale.com/fsm/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=29690

I dont want to turn off my sigs but having 6 large photos of a plane being built is going too far
here are the photos in his sig the other ones in there are ok with me






and a list of what hes going to make
"Gee, sir, I was thinking them depleted uranium shells would speed his journey to his maker; so I fired a lot of 'em! "
*Shelved:
Tamiya 1/48 P-47 Bubbletop
Esci 1/72 F-35 JSF
Monogram 1/48 F-15E
Revell-Monogram 1/48 F-14D
Academy 1/48 F-14A
*On the Bench:
Hasegawa 1/72 F-18E Super Bug

I personally agree, I like the signatures too... especially what people are working on... there's aircraft I didnt even know existed until I started reading them... (thank you KJ200)

I agree 4 or 5 large pics in a sig gets annoying when a user only posts two words... but by and far that is an exception rather than a rule...

I do agree if you dont like it, turn off the sigs... if you feel you are missing something then turn them back on to read them then disable them again... Like fighnjoe.... I always enjoy seeing his sig... it has style... tells me a little something about him. djmodels... I know something about at least his modelling persona through his sig... ME for example... you know one, I like aircraft. I like them in WWII especially, I was in the Navy or have leanings toward the Navy etc...

I say everything in moderation, including self control... so if they wanna go out and put pics on their sigs then fine! I'm not paying for the FSM bandwidth... (ok I am because I subscribe but diff story haha) ...if I was on dial up I am sure I would disable them... BUT... it comes down to: when does the right to view this forum, and view it with sigs... and view it FAST, interfere with the right or people to personalize their sig?

Answer... never! this is not a democracy here, not an autocracy etc... it IS... it exists and we must learn to adapt...

I like the signatures, personally. I don't think that members here are gloating when they add text on what they are building or what is next, but that's me. I think we should all have the freedom to place whatever we want on our sigs...makes for some interesting reading!

Regards, Dan

Thank God that someone brought this up. I'm all for rankings and signatures, but SOME restriction has to be placed. Not too certain about other forums, but the Armor one has some users that just plain and simple have TOO MUCH. What is it that you're trying to prove?
There were some users that had ridiculously large images in their signature. I can appreciate a good 1/72 scale build, but I don't need to see it blown up to 1/24 proportions. That's just too much. That and the addition of users listing 20 different projects that they're working on. Even though text is OK, since it's not large, it just seems to be a childish gloat "Hey, look at me, look at what I'm doing".
Please, lets have something done about this. I'm on a high speed network (couple of T3 lines) at work, and even here some threds just take a ridiculous amount of time to load.
And don't forget that the size of the image isn't the only thing. The more links you have, the more packets have to be sent through the network to get those links loades.
Can you tell I'm P.O.ed at this?
There should be a forum-wide announcement urgint people for some restraint.

QUOTE: Originally posted by nicholma Leave it be and just turn off the option to view if you don't like it. I personally have them off because it takes too long to load, but occassionally I'll change the option just to see what is on. As Fightnjoe says its part of an individual's forum personality.

But this is like Jratz's comment about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Many users have very good information in their signatures. Like mine is a link to a website I maintain photographs of modern US Army equipment. Others have similar "valuable" links to good reference sites.

Some of the multitude of banners, icons and images in some signatures really made up a lot of clutter. It was hard to read some of the posts. I did not want to turn off the signatures for reasons stated above so I just avoided threads where the posters had "signature bloat".

Nothing against you personally djmodels1999, but I started avoiding your posts when your signature block took up more screen space than all the text of the thread combined. I didn't find it interesting, just cluttered.

I don't think signature banners should be stopped or the option set to "off". We, the users of the forums, just need to keep them within reason.

Kind of odd that nobody from FSM has checked in on this with an official position.
As far as I'm concerned the signature size doesn't bother me (I have a DSL connection)
but I can see where someone on dial-up would be bothered by it.

Leave it be and just turn off the option to view if you don't like it. I personally have them off because it takes too long to load, but occassionally I'll change the option just to see what is on. As Fightnjoe says its part of an individual's forum personality.

Edog,

It's something very easy to 'forget' you know. I thought too that my list was informative, all the more because it's always rapidly changing. I'm interested in what people here are building, but also in their future plans. Mine are always changing and you never know, you might get a kick out of such a list, or be able to share tips and experience. But then I do not read my own posts very often..! I got the idea from other members of this Forum, but I have to admit, after reading this, that it must have been annoying after a while...

Jratz may not be the most tactful member, but he had a valid point.

Personally, I see keeping signatures small as a courtesy to other modelers who have slower connections.
IMHO, big signatures also distract from the actual posts and the info carried therein, I normally automatically
deactivate avatars, signatures, etc when I join a new list.

My personal Opinion aside if a forum has no rules to limit signatures sizes than we cannot complain about big ones.

I think the sig-tags reflect a person’s personality.

I do find signatures that take up more than one screen quite annoying, but hey if DJ wants to list his 294 kits, I can always turn off the option to view signatures. By the way, his signature was quite informative and I thought it was a good idea until I had to scroll through it for the 5th or so time. Actually, I find the fact that most sig-tags are now longer than the posts they accompany to be quite funny.

I just don’t understand what the problem is here. You have the option. If you don’t like the long sig-tags then turn them off.

i have waited on this one, not wanting to inflame this anymore than i have to. now is time to offer my opinion on this subject. as i look through the forums i see many many sigs. pics, quotes, tags, and combinations. when i look i realize that my sig is one of the largest on the forums. saying that i want to make myself clear. i wont change mine. the reasoning. everyone here is an individual and has a personality, my online personality includes the slideshow, the group builds i have entered, toasting, and the lem sig tag. i cannot in clear conscous ignore nor can i supress the them. they are a part of me. if i were to ignore them or supress them i would be losing a part of my personality. no matter which forum i am on my sig is very similar. where possible i post the slideshow and the lem banner. most i also post my favorite line about the most glaring mistake of the pearl harbor attack. these things are part of my online personality. part of who i am.


thanks for reading.

joe

QUOTE: Originally posted by Woody QUOTE: Originally posted by rjkplasticmod If you want a site with no Avatars, no Sigs, no Post Counts, etal., just plain old straight text messages, spend some time on Hyperscale @ www.hyperscale.com Wow, that's a scary thought. If FSM keeps giving into these complaints by a few , I guess that is where we are headed. As noted elsewhere, sig images are hosted by other sites and don't use FSM's bandwidth. FSM should stop working to be like other sites and realize that, the vast majority real enjoy the site as is.

As Dwight suggested, for those of you who don't care for some of the sig tags out there; privately email, rather than make this forum a potential battleground for dispute. Personally, until Dave tells me otherwise, I'll continue to keep mine as is. I enjoy participating in the hobby, and if I can display that joy, then I'll be doing it on my sig line, as well as in posts. Those that don't care for it, as has been mentioned several times, may simply turn off the the graphics viewing on their particular PC. My two cents worth...............Regards, Ed

Due to the lack of a clearer policy on this matter, I always make it a personal rule to send a sample of the sig images (or a combination thereof) to DVOSS for checking if it is acceptable as far as bandwidth is concerned.

Personally, I believe that since no such clear-cut policy is available, it would not be proper to criticize others for what they do with their sig. I personally would just e-mail that member (or members) if I believe his/her/their sig images are too large or something and perhaps just request him/her/them to try to tone the sig images down.