Please read

tank girl said:
tsk tsk, I can't help it if I'm so damn popular :lol:

now, I thought that it was quite fitting, being a signature thread instituted by the very one with OTCs most sucky sig - to bring the matter up. It is a personal attack after all, and I should have a right to complain about it shouldn't I? Or do administrators get away with everything...

The way to complain is using the Town Hall or sending a PM.

Did I say I love Winky's sig??
 
Luis G said:
The way to complain is using the Town Hall or sending a PM.

Did I say I love Winky's sig??

G was the guy that brought the sig issue up here :p I thought it was strange too....
 
Alrighty then. Let's start over, shall we?

This thread was started at MY behest, because I've been there done that and really didn't want to do it again. It was to discuss this
Some of the signatures here need to be toned down in size, so here are some limits you'll need to follow presently:

1) Signature pics are to be limited to 350x150 pixels if not accompanied by any text
1a) If they are to be accompanied by text, the picture is to be limited to 350x100 pixels

2) Signature text when not accompanied by a pic (not including standard ~15x15 size smilies) is to be limited to 4 lines of text at normal size, OR 6 lines of text at small size. A long line wrapping around is counted as another line, and these lines will be judged based on a 1024x768 screen resolution and with the browser's text size set to Medium, or whichever is the browser's normal, out-of-the-box text size.
2a) If there is a sig pic along with the text (see 1a), there cannot be more than 2 lines of text at normal font size, OR 3 lines of text at small size.

We still reserve the right to remove or edit a signature we deem sucky. :beerbang:
and only that from the link at the top of this thread. If anyone has any issue with the actual content of any signature on the board, please feel free to PM an admin or mod of your choice.

Thank you to all who are self-regulating their sig sizes.
 
Luis G said:
Yeah, I love Winky's sig :D :D
I hear ya!

Some women are so hot it hurts to even look at them!!!

Golly Gee!!!!!


So_Fine.JPG
 
tank girl said:
now, I thought that it was quite fitting, being a signature thread instituted by the very one with OTCs most sucky sig - to bring the matter up. It is a personal attack after all, and I should have a right to complain about it shouldn't I? Or do administrators get away with everything...

A personal attack? Hell girl YOU wrote those words. I'm just immortalizing them. Sorry, my apologies. I forgot...YOU don't care about facts. My bad, so sad.
 
Gonz said:
over 4 lines at 640x480 on a 14" monitor...maybe :hmm:


The resolution and the size of the monitor, are irrelevant.

There are more than 4 lines of text there, to make it easier for you to count I have high-lighted it for you.

pfft2qa.jpg


1, 2, 3, 4 (yes, the space does count as a line) 5.

This not not even include the lines of the quotation box.

For your personal knowledge, I am looking at this on a 19" monitor @ 1280x1024 pixels.

Now, I have no choice but to ban you.




:D
 
He is now banned. I also threw him in jail for the next 25 years.


That will learn him, next time he has a sig over 4 lines, eh?









:D
 
"quote" doesn't count, Next.


K62 said:
The resolution and the size of the monitor, are irrelevant.

There are more than 4 lines of text there, to make it easier for you to count I have high-lighted it for you.

pfft2qa.jpg


1, 2, 3, 4 (yes, the space does count as a line) 5.

This not not even include the lines of the quotation box.

For your personal knowledge, I am looking at this on a 19" monitor @ 1280x1024 pixels.

Now, I have no choice but to ban you.




:D
 
Gonz said:
A personal attack? Hell girl YOU wrote those words. I'm just immortalizing them. Sorry, my apologies. I forgot...YOU don't care about facts. My bad, so sad.

ERM... immortalizing them by misquoting me out of context? OKAAAY :rolleyes:

it would appear in that respect, you wouldn't care about the 'facts' either.

I stand by those words, in the original (both) context. And 'tis true that I don't care about the 'facts' in fact, It would simply be more accurate to say that I don't trust the so-called 'facts' - because 'facts' are only necessarily ONE perspective of the (so-called) 'truth'....

and being the cynic that I am; there is no truth. :p

It would appear that some might be better off around here If they listened to their heart more than so-called 'reason'; whilst having every godforsaken opinion strung along by the balls.
 
tank girl said:
I stand by those words, in the original (both) context. And 'tis true that I don't care about the 'facts' in fact, It would simply be more accurate to say that I don't trust the so-called 'facts' - because 'facts' are only necessarily ONE perspective of the truth....


:D :lol: :lol2: :rofl: :rofl3: :rofl4:

Fact...air is needed for human survival. Perspective? :rofl4:
 
Back
Top