Should sig pics be 400x100? [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

View Full Version : Should sig pics be 400x100?

Tenbatsuzen

07-04-2006, 07:11 AM

For at least four years, RF.net's sig pics have been a mandatory 300x100.  The official reason is to speed up load times as well as the unofficial reason being that the sig area shouldn't turn into a wackbag nightmare. That being said, although I agree that the sig area shouldn't be dominated by huge pictures, I wanted to see if the mods and admins of RF.net would take it under consideration to increase the sig pic allowance to 400x100, allowing all of the great designers on the board a little more leeway and flexibility in designing sig pics.  I would say that the majority of RF.net users have high-speed internet, and the increase of an extra 100 pixels shouldn't be that big of an issue on the data size, and 400x100 won't screw up the tables of the posts either.  ...I'll hang up and listen to your response.

mikeyboy

07-04-2006, 07:25 AM

A. By my count, this is your third thread related to sig sizes in the last 2 weeks.  Seek help.B. Userbars are lame.C. I was this close to editing your poll to change the question to "Should Matty quit trying to make ronfez.net policy?"

Tenbatsuzen

07-04-2006, 07:30 AM

mikeyboy wrote: A. By my count, this is your third thread related to sig sizes in the last 2 weeks. Seek help.B. Userbars are lame.C. I was this close to editing your poll to change the question to "Should Matty quit trying to make ronfez.net policy?"   There was the Jon PSA one, which was the pre-cursor to this.  Where's #3? This isn't about Userbars.  That's something separate really, for myspace. I'm not trying to change RF.net policy.  I'm asking why are we using an outdated rule, which was designated before HSI was available readily? If you can give me an legitimate reason why the sigs must stay at 300x100, then I'll back off.  But it's not a data thing, it's not a storage thing, and it won't mess up the posts.

mikeyboy

07-04-2006, 07:39 AM

Tenbatsuzen wrote:  mikeyboy wrote: A. By my count, this is your third thread related to sig sizes in the last 2 weeks. Seek help.B. Userbars are lame.C. I was this close to editing your poll to change the question to "Should Matty quit trying to make ronfez.net policy?" There was the Jon PSA one, which was the pre-cursor to this.  Where's #3?<a href="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm/TOPIC/51074/FORUM/52/page/The_Userbars_Thread.htm" target="_self">This one.</a>This isn't about Userbars.  That's something separate really, for myspace.Really?Userbars are like a cross between Sigpics and Avatars.  Although the standard dimension of a userbar doesn't allow you to use it on RonFez.net, 350x19, although I personally think the 300x100 rule is antiquated in the time of high speed internet.  I don't think people should have sigs the size they have at wackbag, but I think 400x100 is acceptable.I'm not trying to change RF.net policy.  I'm asking why are we using an outdated rule, which was designated before HSI was available readily?If you can give me an legitimate reason why the sigs must stay at 300x100, then I'll back off.  But it's not a data thing, it's not a storage thing, and it won't mess up the posts.You aren't owed a legitimate reason.  Nothing related to your membership on this board is a right -- it's a privilege.  That is the board policy.  Board policy might change in the future, but as it stands right now, that is the rule for sig sizes.  Sure the change may be slight, but the fact that you want it to change is not enough reason to effectuate that change.  If you want a board that conforms to the Matty standards, go start your own.

mdr55

07-04-2006, 07:52 AM

Sig pics........what's that?

SinA

07-04-2006, 08:07 AM

What's this I hear about mod-quotes?

Stankfoot

07-04-2006, 08:42 AM

mikeyboy wrote: Tenbatsuzen wrote: mikeyboy wrote: A. By my count, this is your third thread related to sig sizes in the last 2 weeks. Seek help.B. Userbars are lame.C. I was this close to editing your poll to change the question to "Should Matty quit trying to make ronfez.net policy?" There was the Jon PSA one, which was the pre-cursor to this. Where's #3?<a target="_self" href="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm/TOPIC/51074/FORUM/52/page/The_Userbars_Thread.htm">This one.</a>  This isn't about Userbars. That's something separate really, for myspace.  Really? Userbars are like a cross between Sigpics and Avatars. Although the standard dimension of a userbar doesn't allow you to use it on RonFez.net, 350x19, although I personally think the 300x100 rule is antiquated in the time of high speed internet. I don't think people should have sigs the size they have at wackbag, but I think 400x100 is acceptable.   I'm not trying to change RF.net policy. I'm asking why are we using an outdated rule, which was designated before HSI was available readily?If you can give me an legitimate reason why the sigs must stay at 300x100, then I'll back off. But it's not a data thing, it's not a storage thing, and it won't mess up the posts.  You aren't owed a legitimate reason. Nothing related to your membership on this board is a right -- it's a privilege. That is the board policy. Board policy might change in the future, but as it stands right now, that is the rule for sig sizes. Sure the change may be slight, but the fact that you want it to change is not enough reason to effectuate that change. If you want a board that conforms to the Matty standards, go start your own.  <img border="0" src="http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a350/stankfoot/trophy.jpg" />  ....and the Vocabulary Award goes to mikeyboy for using "effectuate" in a sentence. Now if you'll excuse me I'm heading over to Matty.net where a person is free to express themselves with huge Sigpics and cool Userbars!

SinA

07-04-2006, 08:47 AM

<img height="364" src="http://webpages.charter.net/s_a/c.images/bigsig.jpg" width="368" border="0" />i'm just sayin...

mikeyboy

07-04-2006, 08:56 AM

SinA wrote: <img height="364" src="http://webpages.charter.net/s_a/c.images/bigsig.jpg" width="368" border="0" />i'm just sayin...Ouch.  How many times did you have to hit refresh to get to that one?

SinA

07-04-2006, 09:06 AM

mikeyboy wrote: SinA wrote: *i'm just sayin...Ouch.  How many times did you have to hit refresh to get to that one?Zero.  I screen-cap all of your posts for my files.

MadMatt

07-04-2006, 09:11 AM

Mikeyboy, it sounds like you are operating from your personal thoughts and ideas about Tenbats rather than looking at this logically.Isn't this type of poll/idea the way to find out if there is support for an issue?  Matty has an idea for a change on the board and wanted to find out if there was widespread support for said idea.  Isn't that the way most change occurs?  An idividual has an idea and asks others if they agree.I know that everything we do on the board is a privilege, and I truely appreciate the freedom we have here, but I think you're getting mad about nothing.  If I had put up this poll and not Tenbats, I don't think you would have acted the same way.Please know that I am not making a personal attack on you Mikey, because I think you are great.  However, I thought I needed to say something.I vote we mke sigpics 30 X 10.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />

mikeyboy

07-04-2006, 09:40 AM

MadMatt wrote: Mikeyboy, it sounds like you are operating from your personal thoughts and ideas about Tenbats rather than looking at this logically.Isn't this type of poll/idea the way to find out if there is support for an issue?  Matty has an idea for a change on the board and wanted to find out if there was widespread support for said idea.  Isn't that the way most change occurs?  An idividual has an idea and asks others if they agree.I know that everything we do on the board is a privilege, and I truely appreciate the freedom we have here, but I think you're getting mad about nothing.  If I had put up this poll and not Tenbats, I don't think you would have acted the same way.Please know that I am not making a personal attack on you Mikey, because I think you are great.  However, I thought I needed to say something.I vote we mke sigpics 30 X 10.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />I have no problem with Matty starting this poll.  If I did, I would have locked it and/or moved it to purgatory.  I do take umbrage with Matty's insinuations that the sig sizes should be changed barring a "legitimate reason" why larger sigs shouldn't be allowed.  That just screams of entitlement.  All I'm saying is that board policy is what it is.  We may make changes in the future based on the needs and the membership of the board, but we don't need to justify that policy as it is because some people want to add some new, shiny bells and whistles to their posts.  We may ultimately decide to adopt the 400X100 rule.  Who knows?  I won't speak for the board staff at this point, because it isn't something we've discussed recently.

FezPaul

07-04-2006, 09:40 AM

SinA wrote: mikeyboy wrote: SinA wrote: *i'm just sayin...Ouch.  How many times did you have to hit refresh to get to that one?Zero.  I screen-cap all of your posts for my files.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/laugh.gif" border="0" /><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/thumbup.gif" border="0" />

SatCam

07-04-2006, 09:47 AM

I say move it to 400x100 as long as the 40kb limit stays. Matty, the dimensions of the image have very little to do with the connection speed... it has to do with screen resolution.

This message was edited by SatCam on 7-4-06 @ 1:48 PM

MadMatt

07-04-2006, 10:05 AM

mikeyboy wrote: MadMatt wrote: Mikeyboy, it sounds like you are operating from your personal thoughts and ideas about Tenbats rather than looking at this logically.Isn't this type of poll/idea the way to find out if there is support for an issue?  Matty has an idea for a change on the board and wanted to find out if there was widespread support for said idea.  Isn't that the way most change occurs?  An idividual has an idea and asks others if they agree.I know that everything we do on the board is a privilege, and I truely appreciate the freedom we have here, but I think you're getting mad about nothing.  If I had put up this poll and not Tenbats, I don't think you would have acted the same way.Please know that I am not making a personal attack on you Mikey, because I think you are great.  However, I thought I needed to say something.I vote we mke sigpics 30 X 10.I have no problem with Matty starting this poll.  If I did, I would have locked it and/or moved it to purgatory.  I do take umbrage with Matty's insinuations that the sig sizes should be changed barring a "legitimate reason" why larger sigs shouldn't be allowed.  That just screams of entitlement.  All I'm saying is that board policy is what it is.  We may make changes in the future based on the needs and the membership of the board, but we don't need to justify that policy as it is because some people want to add some new, shiny bells and whistles to their posts.  We may ultimately decide to adopt the 400X100 rule.  Who knows?  I won't speak for the board staff at this point, because it isn't something we've discussed recently.  That is a very good point.  I didn't see that as the issue you were trying to make and I apologize.Thank you for responding and making a salient point.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />

Tenbatsuzen

07-04-2006, 10:20 AM

mikeyboy wrote: MadMatt wrote: Mikeyboy, it sounds like you are operating from your personal thoughts and ideas about Tenbats rather than looking at this logically.Isn't this type of poll/idea the way to find out if there is support for an issue? Matty has an idea for a change on the board and wanted to find out if there was widespread support for said idea. Isn't that the way most change occurs? An idividual has an idea and asks others if they agree.I know that everything we do on the board is a privilege, and I truely appreciate the freedom we have here, but I think you're getting mad about nothing. If I had put up this poll and not Tenbats, I don't think you would have acted the same way.Please know that I am not making a personal attack on you Mikey, because I think you are great. However, I thought I needed to say something.I vote we mke sigpics 30 X 10.<img border="0" src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" />I have no problem with Matty starting this poll. If I did, I would have locked it and/or moved it to purgatory. I do take umbrage with Matty's insinuations that the sig sizes should be changed barring a "legitimate reason" why larger sigs shouldn't be allowed. That just screams of entitlement. All I'm saying is that board policy is what it is. We may make changes in the future based on the needs and the membership of the board, but we don't need to justify that policy as it is because some people want to add some new, shiny bells and whistles to their posts. We may ultimately decide to adopt the 400X100 rule. Who knows? I won't speak for the board staff at this point, because it isn't something we've discussed recently.    You didn't read my post very carefully then.  The whole point was to open up discussion.  Not me putting on my crown as King Matty and saying that board policy should be changed.  I was asking WHY the sigs are still at 300x100. You were the one who copped an attitude first, Mikey.  I was questioning board policy, not being hostile, but being curious. Read the post again.  "Would you take it under consideration".  Not saying policy should or has to be changed.  You met my first post with scorn and condescending attitude.  I asked why.  Not giving you attitude.  And you went off the handle in saying I wasn't "owed" anything.Perhaps the term "legitimate reason" was a little strong, but I wasn't sure how to exactly word it.

mikeyboy

07-04-2006, 11:04 AM

Tenbatsuzen wrote:  mikeyboy wrote: MadMatt wrote: Mikeyboy, it sounds like you are operating from your personal thoughts and ideas about Tenbats rather than looking at this logically.Isn't this type of poll/idea the way to find out if there is support for an issue? Matty has an idea for a change on the board and wanted to find out if there was widespread support for said idea. Isn't that the way most change occurs? An idividual has an idea and asks others if they agree.I know that everything we do on the board is a privilege, and I truely appreciate the freedom we have here, but I think you're getting mad about nothing. If I had put up this poll and not Tenbats, I don't think you would have acted the same way.Please know that I am not making a personal attack on you Mikey, because I think you are great. However, I thought I needed to say something.I vote we mke sigpics 30 X 10.<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />I have no problem with Matty starting this poll. If I did, I would have locked it and/or moved it to purgatory. I do take umbrage with Matty's insinuations that the sig sizes should be changed barring a "legitimate reason" why larger sigs shouldn't be allowed. That just screams of entitlement. All I'm saying is that board policy is what it is. We may make changes in the future based on the needs and the membership of the board, but we don't need to justify that policy as it is because some people want to add some new, shiny bells and whistles to their posts. We may ultimately decide to adopt the 400X100 rule. Who knows? I won't speak for the board staff at this point, because it isn't something we've discussed recently.    You didn't read my post very carefully then.  The whole point was to open up discussion.  Not me putting on my crown as King Matty and saying that board policy should be changed.  I was asking WHY the sigs are still at 300x100.You were the one who copped an attitude first, Mikey.  I was questioning board policy, not being hostile, but being curious.Read the post again.  "Would you take it under consideration".  Not saying policy should or has to be changed.  You met my first post with scorn and condescending attitude.  I asked why.  Not giving you attitude.  And you went off the handle in saying I wasn't "owed" anything.Perhaps the term "legitimate reason" was a little strong, but I wasn't sure how to exactly word it....and you didn't read my first post carefully.  I was goofing on your seemingly bizarre fixation with sig sizes, your recent love affair with user bars, and your recent trend towards speaking on behalf of the board (e.g.  telling people what they can and can't complain about, telling people when certain topics no longer warrant discussion because they've been discussed do many times before, telling a new member that they aren't welcome because they don't like NASCAR and you don't like their sig, etc.)  No scorn or condescension -- it's called a joke.  I didn't get anything stuck in my craw until you started throwing around the term "legitimate reason".  I've already made it abundently clear that this discussion is fine, and we'll take the idea under advisement.  If you have a suggestion, you can make an argument in support of that suggestion, and it will be considered.  On the other side of the coin, if you have a suggestion as to how the board should be changed, it's not our responsibility to you to rebut your suggestion if we decide not to

Death Metal Moe

07-04-2006, 11:15 AM

I have a big head.  I could use the extra sig pic space.Can we at least discuss it?

Tenbatsuzen

07-04-2006, 11:18 AM

Death Metal Moe wrote: I have a big head. I could use the extra sig pic space.Can we at least discuss it?   That was prime real estate for "future mods"

Don Stugots

07-04-2006, 05:11 PM

Matty, why are you pissing off Big Brother?  do you want him to wipe you head of these radical ideas?  (i agree with Moe, if matty uses less sig pic space and others follow suit, can other people have bigger ones?)

suggums

07-04-2006, 05:32 PM

who really cares?

Don Stugots

07-04-2006, 05:59 PM

suggums wrote: who really cares? its obvious that matty cares.

Death Metal Moe

07-04-2006, 06:03 PM

There's been a lot of joking around, mostly at Matty's expense again for whatever reason (I think it's getting old bashing him everytime he opens his mouth) but anway...I have always wanted to see the restrictions lifted on the sig pics, ever since I got here.  It's not a HUGE deal, but I personally don't see the use of having the old 100x300 rule anymore.  Even if the board made an exception JUST for Userbars or a certian amount of them, why not?

Don Stugots

07-04-2006, 06:06 PM

Death Metal Moe wrote: There's been a lot of joking around, mostly at Matty's expense again for whatever reason (I think it's getting old bashing him everytime he opens his mouth) but anway...I have always wanted to see the restrictions lifted on the sig pics, ever since I got here.  It's not a HUGE deal, but I personally don't see the use of having the old 100x300 rule anymore.  Even if the board made an exception JUST for Userbars or a certian amount of them, why not?Please dont anyone take my goofing around as Matty bashing.  i was just breaking balls.

Death Metal Moe

07-04-2006, 06:08 PM

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone because I'm probably guilty of it too in radio related threads.  I'm sure I've just expected Matty to be an asshole and responded that way before I even read what he had to say.I try never to do that, personally, and I think that too many on the board do it.

trackstand

07-04-2006, 06:08 PM

Question: 1. Yes 2. No    For at least four years, RF.net's sig pics have been a mandatory 300x100.  The official reason is to speed up load times as well as the unofficial reason being that the sig area shouldn't turn into a wackbag nightmare. That being said, although I agree that the sig area shouldn't be dominated by huge pictures, I wanted to see if the mods and admins of RF.net would take it under consideration to increase the sig pic allowance to 400x100, allowing all of the great designers on the board a little more leeway and flexibility in designing sig pics.  I would say that the majority of RF.net users have high-speed internet, and the increase of an extra 100 pixels shouldn't be that big of an issue on the data size, and 400x100 won't screw up the tables of the posts either.  ...I'll hang up and listen to your response.   Pull your pants up and get a hobby.

trackstand

07-04-2006, 06:11 PM

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone because I'm probably guilty of it too in radio related threads.  I'm sure I've just expected Matty to be an asshole and responded that way before I even read what he had to say.I try never to do that, personally, and I think that too many on the board do it. Very nice Hamburgeler.

Death Metal Moe

07-04-2006, 06:12 PM

trackstand wrote:   Very nice Hamburgeler.Spell it right and I'll think of being insulted one day.

Don Stugots

07-04-2006, 06:16 PM

Death Metal Moe wrote: I'm not pointing fingers at anyone because I'm probably guilty of it too in radio related threads.  I'm sure I've just expected Matty to be an asshole and responded that way before I even read what he had to say.I try never to do that, personally, and I think that too many on the board do it.well, Moe, Matty, anyone, i will clear it up on my end.  I was goofing and i think/hope that Matty knows this.  i am very rarely serious here and i try not to just bash anyone.

furie

07-04-2006, 06:29 PM

how about 300 x 150?