Subject:
|
Re: Poll: Use of Images in Signatures
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Sun, 8 Jun 2003 00:00:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1386 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
While I did not choose “deeply flawed”, I’m operating on the assumption that
selecting a text length preference implies that you don’t want to see images
used in sigs at all. That wasn’t entirely clear from the poll description. Was
that your intent?
|
Yes, that was my intent. Sorry for the the confusion. I really tried to make
the poll clear, but as we’ve seen with these LUGNET polls time and again, what
seems clear to the poll creator is not always clear to the voter, hence my
inclusion of the “deeply flawed” response option.
So to Bill, I would say that any of the “I would prefer that people limit their
signatures to x lines of text” responses additionally were meant to imply “and
images not be permitted in signature files”. I can see how that is not
necessarily an obvious implication, so again, my apologies for not making the
poll a little clearer.
As for whether images in signature files (or anywhere on LUGNET) should be
allowed to animate (God help us, please no), that would have to be the subject
of a separate poll.
-Rev. Smith
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Poll: Use of Images in Signatures
|
| In lugnet.general, Brendan Powell Smith wrote: <snip> Thanks for taking the time to create the poll... While I did not choose "deeply flawed", I'm operating on the assumption that selecting a text length preference implies that you don't want to see (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jun-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
3 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
|
|
|
|
