Sig Guideline Petition

So it has come to my attention as of late that the sig rules are outdated. These rules were designed when dial-up was the norm, and broadband was for rich people. In this day and age if you don't have a broadband connection there is something wrong.

Therefore I petition that the sig guidelines be changed to something that better reflects the current times. I believe we should still have some sort of cap, especially on the height of the image as a sig that is to tall takes up a lot of page space. However The cap should defiantly not be 350 x 150 anymore. I would say something like 600 x 200 would be a lot more reasonable.

To give you an example of what it would look like:



Who agrees?


Edited by Snake6 - 21 April 2008 at 12:31am

For sure.
500 x 350 is a totally reasonable size. I say we go for it and if there's a
significant clamor from 56kers we can consider changing it back.

I never had a real issue when I had dial-up with big pictures or sigs. If anyone has problems with dial-up, get a better computer or stop looking at pron.

I for one, oppose.

On the grounds I'm too anti-conformist to support this.

Agent Whale?

Did I miss something?

what's wrong with keeping sigs small?


i'm sorry, but i don't want to see giant ass pictures every time i scroll down in a thread.

Oppose and Support.

I see nothing wrong with allowing increased width of signatures to no more than 700 pixels.

However, an increased height by any significance gets annoying when it comes to scrolling down pages. Push it up to no more than 180 if you think it's alright to push it up at all.

Yes, increase the width.

Not the height too much though, 350 is gigantic.

we should at least allow 450 x 250...

Edited by -ProDigY- - 21 April 2008 at 12:26am

Can someone fill me in?(on agent whale)