Size of sig

[GenoXide]

WOW!!, & I thought that I was an idiot as a kid to have an incendiary bomb in a kitchen cupboard, but a large bomb, no sireee!, even if it was hollowed out.
One more WWII tale, during a raid, an incendiary bomb landed on the pavement three feet from our front door, an elderly neighbour shovelled it up & dropped it into a bucket of water, then accidently knocked the bucket over!!, they didn't weigh much, they were made of aluminium, which melted when the magnesium ignited, but there was a scar on that pavement for many years after the war, until the council replaced it with asphalt.

Now, I explained this before, admin at CF do not allow anyting but plain script in sigs, the Administrator himself has been asked several times about this, but he is adamant, he is a nice guy though, [David Lindon ] why don't you send him a PM about it, he won't budge, but I expect he'll give his reasons, or refer you to a notice.

haha! Well, I assure you, that the bomb that my grandfather had (he past away a few years ago) was completely hollowed out and a dud. There was absolutly no explosive ordance within it. I was freaked out when I first saw it. I was like, "What are you doing! That's a BOMB!" but then they assured me it was OK and wouldn't explode. Even if it did have ordance in it, it's well over 60 years old so I'm sure the explosives inside may have gone bad, due to it being outside his shop and completely exposed to weather and thigns liek that.

But back to the subject. I think that signatures pictures is a good idea, so long as peopel don't abuse the idea. There is not reaosn why this place couldn't have them, other then the fact that the administrator doesn't want them. I think if people want them, why not give it a chance? It's just an idea, and should it not work out, well, at least you tried right?

 

[Brookfield]

haha! Well, I assure you, that the bomb that my grandfather had (he past away a few years ago) was completely hollowed out and a dud. There was absolutly no explosive ordance within it. I was freaked out when I first saw it. I was like, "What are you doing! That's a BOMB!" but then they assured me it was OK and wouldn't explode. Even if it did have ordance in it, it's well over 60 years old so I'm sure the explosives inside may have gone bad, due to it being outside his shop and completely exposed to weather and thigns liek that.

But back to the subject. I think that signatures pictures is a good idea, so long as peopel don't abuse the idea. There is not reaosn why this place couldn't have them, other then the fact that the administrator doesn't want them. I think if people want them, why not give it a chance? It's just an idea, and should it not work out, well, at least you tried right?

Your grandfather's bomb may have been made by Polish forced labour, one fell on a house, & went right through to the cellar, & didn't explode, when the bomb squad arrived, it's detonatator had been put in the wrong way round, & attached to it inside was a note; "Made in Poland, more to follow"

Off subject again, better PM me if you want to hear more tales, I've got plenty, heard of butterfly bombs or oil bombs?? get PMing!

 

[~NeonFire372~]

haha! Well, I assure you, that the bomb that my grandfather had (he past away a few years ago) was completely hollowed out and a dud. There was absolutly no explosive ordance within it. I was freaked out when I first saw it. I was like, "What are you doing! That's a BOMB!" but then they assured me it was OK and wouldn't explode. Even if it did have ordance in it, it's well over 60 years old so I'm sure the explosives inside may have gone bad, due to it being outside his shop and completely exposed to weather and thigns liek that.

But back to the subject. I think that signatures pictures is a good idea, so long as peopel don't abuse the idea. There is not reaosn why this place couldn't have them, other then the fact that the administrator doesn't want them. I think if people want them, why not give it a chance? It's just an idea, and should it not work out, well, at least you tried right?

The forum also looks a lot 'neater' without IMG tags in sigs...

 

[GenoXide]

The forum also looks a lot 'neater' without IMG tags in sigs...

That's rubbish. A forum can look decent yet have signature images, I've seen it, I've also seen it get out of hand as well. In either case, it's not up to me, I'm just simply throwing out the very idea is all.

Siganture pictures are nice to have, espicially with a computerforum, you can't get out of hand with them, as the topic is PCs, it immediatly excludes a variety of bad things that have a tendency to happen. Such an example, "funny" forums, they get it the worst, people depict obscene and stupid images, however, if you go to a Physics forum, you'll notice that peopel post cool things like lightning or electricty flowing or other cool stuff.

With a computer forum, you allow very cool ideas to float around without very much room for bad things. It just matters on what the topic of the forum is, if it allows bad things within the topic, then yes, it's a bad idea, however, with a good topic, such as computers, you eliminate that facotr. It's just a matter on if the staff wants it.

If the staff already monitors the signature size, then that implies that they monitor the sigantures, meaning, that if pictures were to be enabled, they'd just be looking at images instead, and doing basically the same thign they are already doing. From the way I see it, the staff has nothign to lose by enabling signature pictures. And besides, it'd be pretty nifty to see a picture of a Dell XPS Renegade in a signature picture, that case is sweet.

 

[Hackslayer]

hmmm.... sounds like god was with you alot through your life, second Maurice you should lock all the other sig threads you made but keep this open for questions

 

[Brookfield]

That's rubbish. A forum can look decent yet have signature images, I've seen it, I've also seen it get out of hand as well. In either case, it's not up to me, I'm just simply throwing out the very idea is all.

Siganture pictures are nice to have, espicially with a computerforum, you can't get out of hand with them, as the topic is PCs, it immediatly excludes a variety of bad things that have a tendency to happen. Such an example, "funny" forums, they get it the worst, people depict obscene and stupid images, however, if you go to a Physics forum, you'll notice that peopel post cool things like lightning or electricty flowing or other cool stuff.

With a computer forum, you allow very cool ideas to float around without very much room for bad things. It just matters on what the topic of the forum is, if it allows bad things within the topic, then yes, it's a bad idea, however, with a good topic, such as computers, you eliminate that facotr. It's just a matter on if the staff wants it.

If the staff already monitors the signature size, then that implies that they monitor the sigantures, meaning, that if pictures were to be enabled, they'd just be looking at images instead, and doing basically the same thign they are already doing. From the way I see it, the staff has nothign to lose by enabling signature pictures. And besides, it'd be pretty nifty to see a picture of a Dell XPS Renegade in a signature picture, that case is sweet.

It could be a matter of bandwidth, as some members have suggested?

 

[Brookfield]

Maurice you should lock all the other sig threads you made but keep this open for questions

Why?, as far I'm concerned, it applies equally, anyway David advised me by PM to place stickies for all forums.

 

[Hackslayer]

well what if people post in everyone it would be better if there all in the same thread you should keep the others there and stickyed just locked, and a link to this thread for questions, comments ect.

 

[Brookfield]

well what if people post in everyone it would be better if there all in the same thread you should keep the others there and stickyed just locked, and a link to this thread for questions, comments ect.

Still can't see the point.

Guys, comments on Hackslayer's ideas please.

 

[borat_sagdiyev]

hey brookfield, how old are you now??