sig limit

100k?

please.

 

yeah, not happening, craig.

greater good being valued and all. besides, if everyone had 100k, even people on a 512k connection (such as myself) would get a slow-down.

 

thats fust like say if everybody had 10k you would get a "fast-up"

will the limit ever change?

 

I don't think it will as some, probably a decent portion, of our members will always be on dial-up no matter how fast the internet gets.

 

even in a few years when dail-up doesn't exist!?

 

Yup, because aD is a worldwide and extremely well known website. Plus, dial-up will always exist somewhere.

Some people just don't want to pay the extra money for high speed as some people have free dial-up or low cost (~$10/mo. compared to high speed which is probably $40-$50 month) or high speed isn't available in their area.

Peace

 

pair gaines so no ADSL, too expensive to get satellite, out of reach for wireless and cant get ISDN.

 

And not everybody has state of the art graphics capabilities.

Not all of us live with parents who pay the bills.. we have to make do with what we can afford. Some sites have so much irrelevant bouncing junk on a page of posts it crashes my graphics server causing lockups and lots of annoyance.

Rules is rules.. put up or shut up.. We all have to. Anyway, it's a challenge keeping within the size requirements.

 

okay... it was worth a try.

and btw, its rules are rules.

 

Nah it's not.. It's rules is rules.. same as it's "appen as it's well buggered" or "lot of weather we've been havin' for the time of year"

If thee don get yon then tha needs thee gubbins fettlin lad!! We all'uv us deploys (inflicts?) words diffrent, comes from where us lives

 

where is that? the land of poor grammar?

 

the Land of Sean Connery is Going to Kick Your Patooty.

 

Nope.. The land of pies and broken faces!! It's a regional dialect that descends from long ages past

*oh why am I bothering trying to explain history and local pride to a *******??*

 

Some of us here prefer the actual content of the post, not the pretty window dressing that accompanies it. I wish I could direct link to one of the wife's bulletin boards, you'd see why limiting signatures is a great idea, at least 85% of the page is signatures, avatars, and other useless pics associated with the poster.

 

I am not fussed either way. How bout we run a poll and see what is the mojarity of users using and go for mojarity rule that way. Or build an option within every users edit account info page that makes it that it does not load sigs on pages. Just an idea.

 

@borhan9,
Jackpot, that is exactly what we need, filter out the intense graphics for dial up users and they can have faster page load times.
I second the idea.

 

@ borhan..FF does that anyway if I want it to.. There is a setting to "load images from originating site only" and I can add my.afterdawn* to that list to get all the ones stored on profile pages as well. I appreciate that not everyone has this feature as not all browsers work in the same way.
I like a bit of colour on forums, otherwise they get very boring. Here at AD we are lucky to be allowed so much space, a lot of sites limit images to 40x150 with no text.. or text only, one line and no links.

 

Thanks for the praise for my idea guys. Either way it does not bother me. I do use FF and have it on default settings when it comes to the pics. I am on ADSL. But yes it can be an idea for dial up users.

What does admin think??