About signatures

Shouldn't we reconsider the size of signatures?
By 'size' I meant the file size of the picture, may it be .gif or even .jpg

Also to remove some unnecessary disccusion about spoiling them, Images in a spoiler will still load.

Isn't there already a regulation on this matter? I once had a too-large signature and Tegumi messaged me :
"Your signature space is too large. Please make sure your signature area (including all text, images, videos, closed spoilers, etc) does not exceed 300 pixels vertically. Thanks. "

I mean, any file type will do if it doesn't exeed 300 pixels vertically. Just sayin' though XD

Yes, let's say that it's a .gif

A .gif (100px X 200px), but it's filesize = 6.73 MB

now tell me... did you read anything about the file size?

I agree with that. There is no reason for a signature to be megabytes in size.

It was a growing trend several years ago. I remember when forums were really big and everyone decked out their profile with fancy, animating, signatures and avatars. I think most people have gotten over that by now. Still, there are some users with huge signatures, not necessarily in physical size, but in memory allocation. There is just no reason for it. There are plenty of ways to lower the physical memory usage of the image without noticeably lowering the quality of said image.

That said, I'm not usually having problems with the time it takes to load on my end, but I could see others having that issue. My bigger issue are the users of SadPanda. Gelbooru has been asking people for months not to hotlink their images on high traffic sites, and close to everyone ignores them. I see so many slow downs on a page just because someone posted a Sadpanda image and it bogs everything else down. Have some courtesy, use ImageFap or something where they aren't grabbing at every spare gigabyte of bandwidth they have.

Gif must have a crap load of frames to be 6.73MB at 100x200. If any I try and keep my frames to min of at least 30 and go for a file size of 2MB and less.

What if someone had a signature of 10 different .gif and they have a size varying 400 KB - 800 KB? and his/her reason would be "my .gif pictures doesn't even exceed 1 MB"

Quantity also must be reduced

BTW, Your signature is just ok.

10 different .gifs now that's argumentative. I'd say limit gifs in sigs to one. and thanks.

I have four GIFs which are like 20kb each. There is no hard and fast rule, just leave it to the discretion of the moderators.

I don't think it is unreasonable to come up with some kind of guidelines. There is surely a definable line in terms of physical size and memory that there is no reason for a user to cross. Granted it might be quite a debate to find said line, but I bet we could come up with a line that most people could agree with.

I move that all signiture gifs require a spoiler.

With or without spoilers, it will still load.

Just turn them off in your profile if you don't want them to load.

inb4 CSRF sigs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-site_request_forgery

Why? Why not simply allow us to judge where that line is and deal with it as we see fit. I've told a few users who had a few too many gif files/too large a sig to spoiler/remove them/it. I don't know why this is an issue. If you feel a user's signature is too large and takes up too much load time simply report one of their posts and we'll decide whether you're right or not.

I don't think enough people are abusing the system to the point where we need to amend the rule, let's worry about actual problems and rules that need to be changed before we add new ones for the sake of having more rules.

Fair enough.

I would definitely agree it isn't a rampant issue or anything, and not something a few moderators can't take care of. That said, couldn't hurt to keep this conversation open for the future.

the problem is only when they're on screen. it creates an anoying lag when trying to scroll past them. the more gifs in one sig, the greater the lag.



all or none.