• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Sig Pic Rules Change

D

DaveWF

Official CP Entertainment
Joined
Jan 16, 2001
Messages
2,897
Hey everyone -
I've been noticing a trend lately of people slowly getting larger and larger pictures in their signatures. Now, I certainly don't want to stop people from posting pictures - there's a few out there that I enjoy viewing every day. But, some pictures are causing what would be a short thread to turn into a monster scroll to get down a few posts. So, with all this in mind, I wanted to bring a new rule change to everyone's attention. Previously, the rules stated that your sig pic had to be 300x100 or smaller. I don't know if anyone has actually seen a 300x100 picture, but that's pretty darn small. And what about those people that have a 200x200 or a 350x75 pic?

Rod and I discussed the matter and we determined that the best, and easiest way to put a reasonable size limitation on the sig pic was to use a dimensional total limit (width PLUS height) of 500 pixels. What does this mean exactly? Well, basically your picture can be 400x100 or 250x250 or 300x200 - but 400x200 and 350x200 is too big and you'll be asked to either resize it or remove it. By the way, if you dno't know how to determine your pictures dimensions, in Internet Explorer (and probably other browsers as well), right-click the picture and choose properties. It should list the dimensions in pixels. If you are unsure, please provide a link to your picture to myself, or any of the other more-common members around here, we'll be happy to help you out.

This new rule (in case you were wondering) is #9 in the Board-Wide Policies. It is as follows:
Signatures may contain images, but may not have a total dimension (width + height) of 500 pixels. 400x100, 250x250, 300x200, etc. are all ok. 400x150 is not. If your signature is larger than the allotted size given or deemed unacceptable by staff, you will be requested by a moderator to resize or change your image. Please also try and keep text signatures under 5 lines. Failing to comply with a moderator's request will result in the removal of your signature.
Click to expand...

Now we all know there are a couple of jokers around here that will try to be cute and post a 499x1 "picture". My only response to this is Please Don't. You all understand the spirit of this rule - please do not abuse it.

As always, Rod & I have the right to request anyone to remove any picture we may deem unappropriate or inproper. If you refuse to remove it, it will be removed for you and your membership here may be in jeopordy.

Now, we realize this is sudden - and we can't be enforcing it immediately, so there will be a 1 week grace period for everyone to update their signatures. In the mean time, if/when I see a sig that is too large, I will send you a quick PM simply asking you to resize your picture. Please do not think I am singling you out or being rude. I'm just trying to give you a heads up before it becomes an issue.

Now, for all those people out there that are linking to another site's picture and have no way to re-size it, I will be able to host your picture on my site. Please email your already resized picture as an attachment with your CigarPass username to Dave@GreatComputerService.com. I will post it at my site and provide you with a direct link to it.

Thanks for your cooperation in this matter,
Dave
CP Moderator
 
500 pixel is a bit small....I'm thinking 727pixel is a better number. ;)
 
DaveWF said:
But, some pictures are causing what would be a short thread to turn into a monster scroll to get down a few posts. So, with all this in mind, I wanted to bring a new rule change to everyone's attention.

<SNIP>

Rod and I discussed the matter and we determined that the best, and easiest way to put a reasonable size limitation on the sig pic was to use a dimensional total limit (width PLUS height) of 500 pixels. What does this mean exactly? Well, basically your picture can be 400x100 or 250x250 or 300x200 - but 400x200 and 350x200 is too big and you'll be asked to either resize it or remove it.
Click to expand...
If your motive was to reduce the amount of scrolling on the board - does the new limit really help that goal? This still allows for people to have images that are vertically oriented, which is what is pushing the scrolling to an extreme. Under your new rule, users can have vertically-oriented images that are 400+ pixels high.

Why not just enforce the rule you have? Or expand the old rule proportionally (to something like 450 x 150 or even 600 x 200 - which although both bigger sizes than allowed by your new rule, these sizes address your stated problems better than a generic 500-sum pixels does overall - and would slim down scrolling on the board considerably).

Just my 2-cents - I do think it is a good idea to reduce the image sizes, but would prefer to see a rule that forces or encourages horizontal orientation. However, this does remind me that I need to create a sig image soon - the political support ones are starting to outnumber the cute-girl ones... which is a freakin' travesty. :D

Cheers,

- Oak
 
Dave, I'm sorry but I am offended by your photo in your sigtag.


































If you enjoy sleeping in a crib, that's cool, just don't post pics of it please :D


:sign: :sign: :sign: :sign: :sign: :sign: :sign: :sign:
 
oak said:
If your motive was to reduce the amount of scrolling on the board - does the new limit really help that goal? This still allows for people to have images that are vertically oriented, which is what is pushing the scrolling to an extreme. Under your new rule, users can have vertically-oriented images that are 400+ pixels high.

Why not just enforce the rule you have? Or expand the old rule proportionally (to something like 450 x 150 or even 600 x 200 - which although both bigger sizes than allowed by your new rule, these sizes address your stated problems better than a generic 500-sum pixels does overall - and would slim down scrolling on the board considerably).
Click to expand...
I believe both of these issues were covered in my original post.

You're right, someone could have a 400+ pixel high very skinny image. They would be asked to change/remove it for not honoring the "spirit of the rule". I know I only specified 499x1 - but that was to show an extreme case. Use your head here. You know the intention of the rule - you (not you personally Oak - I'm referring to anyone reading this) shouldn't be trying to find an image that will cause problems but is technically within limits. I was trying to avoid a 15 step check list to make sure your picture was ok by using the dimensional total. Please help to make CP an easier place to read by following the spirit of the rules.

As far as the original 300x100 rule being enforced... Then I think just about everyone's sig pic (including mine & Rod's) would have to go. Very few sig pics here have a dimension less then 100 pixels. So let's say we make it 450x150 like you said. Then what about the person that has one that's 300x200? Is that considered ok? What about 175x175? That's certainly much smaller, but one dimension is still to big. The dimensional total concept, although not perfect, seemed like the best way to keep all images generally smaller then some of the biggies we've started to see around here.

Thanks for inquiring,
Dave
 
I actually agree with this change but that's just my .02!

But, I can always just turn sigtags off .............

Dave, you no laugha ata my joka!!!
 
BrownDevil said:
Hopefully this rule doesn't apply to AVB's sig pic :D
Click to expand...
Yep, he got me. My Smokin' Girl is 313x208 now and I'll be shrinking her to 300x199 in the morning. :angry:
 
Somebody please resize mine and have it sent to me??? I have no way of doing it myself ???
 
AVB, I actually like it better smaller as I don't have to scroll down to see her boobs now..... ;)
 
Leebo8-9-8 said:
AVB, I actually like it better smaller as I don't have to scroll down to see her boobs now..... ;)
Click to expand...
I haven't changed her yet. Check again about 7:30 EDT on the 11th.
 
Oh, it must have been all of those scotches yo listed that too so long to scroll..... :D
 
BrownDevil said:
Hopefully this rule doesn't apply to AVB's sig pic :D
Click to expand...
In my opinion, as a gay man, I would vote to prohibit the sexual girlie pictures... and my wife agrees. :sign:

In seriousness, I have long considered recommending that the suggestive pictures be removed because it prevents me (and others, maybe?) from viewing CP at work. I haven't been active at CP lately because I have been spending so much time in the office. I don't want the images cached on my machine at work; but more than that, I don't want someone glancing at my monitor and thinking I'm using business equipment inappropriately. I've never made the suggestion before because frankly, I knew it would be met with some resistance :p . This thread just seemed to have a place for it.

blair
 
Just so you know, I did offer to tone down the pic. Also, you can turn off sig pics so you won't have any problems at work. Look under Options, Board Settings.
 
AVB said:
Just so you know, I did offer to tone down the pic. Also, you can turn off sig pics so you won't have any problems at work. Look under Options, Board Settings.
Click to expand...
You can?! Awesome!! Problem solved, then. I'll check it out. Thanks AVB.


.
.
.

Now, if there is also an option to magnify the picture (for my home PC), I'll finally be happy !! :D
 
Blair I hope you don't have sig pics turned off everywhere, you're missing the new one :0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top