Giant Signatures

[Arnwyn]

Right now I browse with .sigs off, simply because most of them are so annoying.

You can do that? *checks options* Holy cow, you can! Done and done.

But I always wonder if I'm missing out on great stuff....

You're not.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

You're not.

I don't know... Have you tried the rules tracker that I pimp in my signature?

 

[Len]

If someone's sig is longer than the comment they're posting, it seems the sig must be more important so I ignore the comment and just read the sig. It's usually off-topic though.

 

[Buttercup]

In the old days of Usenet (yeah, you whippersnappers, I was there), any .sig over 4 lines was considered excessive.

I was too. I suppose Usenet conventions still have a big influence on the way I post, and how I react to the way others post. For instance, I *really* have to work to avoid using asterisks to denote emphasis. Goll dang new-fangled bold and italics just don't seem right, ya know?

 

[Pbartender]

Things got much better after we turned off html in signatures.

Funny thing is, my signature was much shorter vertically, when the HTML was turned on... I could TABLE the quotes off to the side of the image and save space.

I know mine's a bit longer than I'd like, but I can't yet decide whether to get rid of the image, or my monthly quotes.

 

[Crothian]

I'd lose the image, the Avatar is good enough for a pic

 

[Nightfall]

So what no comment then?

 

[Buttercup]

Alright then, Nightfall. Thanks for toning down your previously annoying signature. But I wasn't only talking about you.

 

[Buttercup]

Pbartender, I agree with Crothian that you don't need the image. I like your quotes, so I hope you keep them!

 

[Gez]

_
P,
What do you think about this: