Ravenheart
01-22-2007, 02:39 AM
I think there should be a limit to them. As a new member it's really a deterrent to open up a thread and have to scroll through a page that's 9/10's the pictures in people's signatures and 1/10 the text that has to do with the actual thread. It makes it difficult to read, and sometimes I find myself feeling that it's not really worth the trouble.
I'm an artist. I deeply appreciate a good hi-res picture. In fact, I refuse to work in anything less than 200 pixels per square inch when I do my photoshop work. But some of these things must be big enough to use as a small desktop. Really, people, how's 'all things in moderation' sound?
I propose that there be a limit to the amount of space in a signature that can be taken up by pictures. This is a rule that I myself would be happy to comply with. What does everyone else think?
I'm an artist. I deeply appreciate a good hi-res picture. In fact, I refuse to work in anything less than 200 pixels per square inch when I do my photoshop work. But some of these things must be big enough to use as a small desktop. Really, people, how's 'all things in moderation' sound?
I propose that there be a limit to the amount of space in a signature that can be taken up by pictures. This is a rule that I myself would be happy to comply with. What does everyone else think?