Subject:
|
Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 May 2003 04:01:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1333 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Tim Courtney wrote:
| |
I suggest limiting signature banners to no larger than standard banner size
(468x60)
|
How do you suggest knowing which images are signature banners?
| |
and avatars to no larger than 75x75,
|
What about 50x80?
How do you suggest knowing which images are avatars?
| |
and not allowing animated images.
|
Even if they’re pornographic?
| |
-Tim (who’s very thankful you didn’t implement blink!)
|
Oh that’s -=(*text*)=- but you don’t want to try that out.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
| (...) Watchful concerned community members who are willing to kindly guide and inform abusers. (...) If you prefer :-) (...) See above. (...) So, no animations, unless they're porn? ;-) (...) :-P Sorry if I'm coming across as a bit negative. I (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
| (...) I don't think we'll have to wait that long... (3 URLs) (I know Chris was just joking here -- we were chatting about it at the time, but he was trying to prove a point by giving an example of overdoing it) I suggest limiting signature banners (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
41 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
