Poted by Hatake on 16 Aug 2005 14:27 - Signatures
I want signatures 
-pokes Indi awake-
You better take care of it
Poted by Indiana on 16 Aug 2005 14:55 -
Oh drat, I forgot about those .. hmm .. I'll make those .. one day. 
Poted by Arota on 17 Aug 2005 16:12 -
Nooooooo! No signatures! They're long and unnecisary and...blah. I can never think up a good one, either. *mutter* Poted by Asilient on 17 Aug 2005 16:15 -
Well... it's another thing I wouldn't use considering I'm too lazy to find an avatar... Poted by Arota on 17 Aug 2005 16:21 -
Yeah, I noticed that. I've been half-thinking about either forcing you to find one or finding one for you. 
Poted by Asilient on 17 Aug 2005 16:33 -
Haha. I'll go about finding one... sometime... Poted by Hatake on 17 Aug 2005 16:57 -
love live signature. If it's a good one ofcourse Poted by Jahara on 30 Apr 2006 05:10 -
I dunno, I kinda like the idea of signatures. 'Course i'm already a crazy Avatar person, if we got signatures i'd have a new one every week. Poted by Indiana on 30 Apr 2006 05:21 -
Well, I gave a thought on those, but because of the website (and forum) design - with the limited space - wouldn't be a very good addition, sorry, folks. Poted by Hatake on 02 May 2006 21:12 -
A shame I already made a dancing Indiana sig 
Poted by Yreogh on 02 May 2006 23:55 -
NO!My gods, no. Signatures are teh evil. They just make it take longer to load a page. And they're not that interesting.
Poted by Arota on 03 May 2006 02:20 -
I agree with Yreogh...sigs are cute, sometimes amusing...but otherwise, just a waste of space, making a page take forever to load and all sorts of other crap. Poted by Yreogh on 03 May 2006 02:37 -
It's not like you need to verify that it's you making the post, with a signature. Not like a signature in a forum will do that. It's just a way to show off stuff that people don't really want to see. Poted by Lupin on 03 May 2006 12:09 -
Meh, some of the Sig's on the Aetolia forums take up my whole screen, that should not happen. Poted by Indiana on 03 May 2006 12:17 -
Ok ... so, here's the last .. proposal. Do you want signatures only in TEXT mode? One should be able to change the colour though (and no endlines to prevent spam). It's the only real alternative I like. Poted by Arota on 03 May 2006 15:45 -
Meh. I prefer the no-sig idea. They're cute, but not necisary, and very spammy. Maybe you could add a 'favourite quote' section to profiles or something, but something that appears after EVER SINGLE POST of a specific person? I've never really seen the point... Poted by Hatake on 04 May 2006 11:25 -
Hmmm nothing wrong with pic sigs. But yeah I also hate those with a shit load of sigs take take a whole page just to show. As for only text sigs that up to you to deceide Indi Poted by Yreogh on 05 May 2006 04:33 -
Hmmm nothing wrong with pic sigs. But yeah I also hate those with a shit load of sigs take take a whole page just to show. As for only text sigs that up to you to deceide Indi
Yes, there are plenty of things wrong with them
They make a page take longer to load
In this case, it makes more work for Indi.
Repetative.
Mucks with page dimensions.
Poted by Indiana on 05 May 2006 05:24 -
Alright, so overall it seems we'll skip them. Poted by Arota on 05 May 2006 16:04 -
Yay! Poted by Sarkis on 06 May 2006 00:02 -
You could standardize the size of all sigs, much liek you did with Avatars. A certain character limit for worded sigs, as well. Keeping is simple, but not infringing on other people's wanting to have them. Hell, I've seen options for someoen turning off sigs, so you don't ahve to see thme if you dun wanna, and save on laoding time.