Subject:
|
Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 May 2003 04:06:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1334 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Todd Lehman wrote:
| |
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?
|
Watchful concerned community members who are willing to kindly guide and inform
abusers.
| |
| |
and avatars to no larger than 75x75,
|
What about 50x80?
|
If you prefer :-)
| |
How do you suggest knowing which images are avatars?
|
See above.
| |
| |
and not allowing animated images.
|
Even if they’re pornographic?
|
So, no animations, unless they’re porn? ;-)
| |
| |
-Tim (who’s very thankful you didn’t implement blink!)
|
Oh that’s -=(*text*)=- but you don’t want to try that out.
|
:-P
Sorry if I’m coming across as a bit negative. I really do appreciate the work
you’re putting into this, and FTX has some definite benefits for posting.
However, I’m really concerned about the quality of conversation we enjoy here
degrading.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
| (...) See, the only thing that worries me about that is sooner or later - one of the guides are going to rub sombody the wrong way and I fear a huge war breaking out over it. I do not think that is too far-fetched. It happens every so often when (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
| | | Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
| (...) Abusers sounds like such a nasty word. If someone embedded a 6000x6000-pixel Hubble Telescope image 10 times in a row as a prank, that would be abuse. If someone wanted a sig image just a little bit bigger than "normal," would that be abuse? (...) (21 years ago, 29-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Signature Image Abuse
|
| (...) How do you suggest knowing which images are signature banners? (...) What about 50x80? How do you suggest knowing which images are avatars? (...) Even if they're pornographic? (...) Oh that's -=(*text*)=- but you don't want to try that out. (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
|
|
|
|
