I have turned signatures off!!! - DPChallenge Forums

05/23/2005 02:56:59 AM · #76

Originally posted by suemack:

Originally posted by kpriest:

I don't know how many people clicked on it, we'll find out tomorrow when the virus is set to go off. ;-)

Fear not. It's relatively harmless. It just locates your images that were entered in the current challenge, defaces them, and re-uploads them through this, um "backdoor" thing I, uh, hacked into. Yeah, that's it.

Message edited by author 2005-05-23 02:57:19.

suemack

Canon EOS-20D

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/23/2005 03:03:15 AM · #77

deapee

Kodak V803

05/23/2005 08:07:12 AM · #78

Well, whatever..everything I say I feel is bent, twisted, or read the wrong way, I'm just done responding.

For the record, I had a damn allergy to laundry detergent -- not anal warts, cysts, or hemhoroids!

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

05/23/2005 08:43:21 AM · #79

Make it one more - I agree with Rex, the signatures are out of control. I've turned mine off a while back as well.

Originally posted by deapee:

...the 5 people who chimed in and agreed with the original poster?

blemt

Nikon D70

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Nikon

05/23/2005 09:19:43 AM · #80

Originally posted by deapee:

We all should get an even vote, anything less is not acceptable. Sure drew or langdon could just go and do it -- and probably will just to spite me,

In general Site Council and the Admins have more important things to do than code changes to the site to spite users. :)

Originally posted by deapee:

If the majority really wants it a certain way, have a vote -- where we all have an equal voice. If *we* decide it should be a certain way, based on the majority, then so be it.

As was pointed out previously, the site is not a democracy. Drew and Langdon care about what people on the site think. Decisions on site changes are discussed at length, and are based on constant user feedback.

We've recieved increased complaints over the last couple of weeks about signature files. We began discussing possible options when this thread started up. There are some issues right now with sig file sizes, and off site graphics that slow down the system.

Part of SC's job is to evaluate the overall usability of the site for EVERYONE. Not just those who "don't mind" the way some features work. If we determine that there is a significant percentage of the population being impacted by large sig files, we may chose to act. Please note that significant does not mean majority.

As always, we are working for you guys. So let us know what you think. :)

Clara

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

05/23/2005 09:31:54 AM · #81

Next thing we know someone will start complaining about the fact we use photos and people reuse them over and over in our threads. We are an artistic bunch and we all have our ideas on what looks good. No one told Michaelangelo not to put the angels on ceilings. Why demand that others take off their signatures?

They gave us the option to turn of signatures. If you dont like the signatures, turn em off.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/23/2005 09:43:21 AM · #82

Originally posted by di53:

That might just be a possibility.

We as a collective have to consider the community as a whole and take into consideration those things that are best for each and every one of us. It could well be that the very things you mention are the root cause of some of the slow downs we have been experiencing of late.

I am not technically inclined, but surely if we keep adding to the size of our submissions, it must have some impact on the speed of delivery. This is one of those issues where I prefer not to let my emotions run rampant, but rather have the technical matter reviewed by competent people and await their findings.

Ray

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/23/2005 09:43:46 AM · #83

Originally posted by di53:

How do you know what anyone told Michaelangelo?

We are complaining and contemplating action because some people are abusing a feature, making it useless to many members. We have other limits around here -- you can't submit an 800-pixel wide photo either. We are talking about another limit.

Check the TOS -- you are not supposed to be using this site to advertise or promote others anyway ... maybe people would prefer TOS suspensions instead of changing their sig.

If you want people to see your art, post an image in an Individual Photo Discussion thread, or direct people to your Portfolio. To make people look at the same image every time you post in the forums is too much like advertising, is annoying, and is more likely to make people "not see" your work anymore rather than drawing people in.

To reiterate my earlier analogy, you are defending the rights of people to drive recklessly, and telling people who obey the speed limit to get off the road if they don't like it. I still find that an exceptionally selfish attitude.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/23/2005 09:49:47 AM · #84

Originally posted by blemt:

We began discussing possible options when this thread started up.

Actually the SC discussion on signature limitations predates this thread by 4 days because of increasing complaints. Large signatures are an abuse of privelege, not a right of expression.

05/23/2005 09:55:34 AM · #85

I love Ken's pics and so do others, but they forget to remove the pic when they use that section of the thread to respond to that section. So you see it again and again and again. Sometimes it slows the thread down sometimes not.

Ken, I'm using reference your pics ONLY because we love them so much and people have a tendancy to reuse them over and over again in the same thread.

SC, is there a way to make the pics so they can't be reused when they quote a section of a thread?

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by di53:
Next thing we know someone will start complaining about the fact we use photos and people reuse them over and over in our threads. We are an artistic bunch and we all have our ideas on what looks good. No one told Michaelangelo not to put the angels on ceilings. Why demand that others take off their signatures?

They gave us the option to turn of signatures. If you dont like the signatures, turn em off.

That might just be a possibility.

We as a collective have to consider the community as a whole and take into consideration those things that are best for each and every one of us. It could well be that the very things you mention are the root cause of some of the slow downs we have been experiencing of late.

I am not technically inclined, but surely if we keep adding to the size of our submissions, it must have some impact on the speed of delivery. This is one of those issues where I prefer not to let my emotions run rampant, but rather have the technical matter reviewed by competent people and await their findings.

Ray

05/23/2005 09:57:56 AM · #86

Originally posted by di53:

They gave us the option to turn of signatures. If you dont like the signatures, turn em off.

Which is what I have done.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I have to turn off the 95% of signatures I'd like to see, because 5% of the people abuse the feature.

And this is so true and it is a shame. I will probably miss some good stuff because of the 5%.

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

05/23/2005 10:05:08 AM · #87

I'm goign to behave myself today..

Originally posted by rex:

Originally posted by di53:

They gave us the option to turn of signatures. If you dont like the signatures, turn em off.

Which is what I have done.

And this is so true and it is a shame. I will probably miss some good stuff because of the 5%.

Canon EOS-60D

05/23/2005 10:07:12 AM · #88

Originally posted by di53:

I'm goign to behave myself today...

Liar, liar, pants on fire!!!! ;o)

05/23/2005 10:10:18 AM · #89

There are angels on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

How do you know what anyone told Michaelangelo?

Message edited by author 2005-05-23 10:12:04.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

05/23/2005 10:11:10 AM · #90

PbbbbbbbbbbbbbTTtttttt

Originally posted by laurielblack:

Originally posted by di53:
I'm goign to behave myself today...

Liar, liar, pants on fire!!!! ;o)

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/23/2005 10:17:32 AM · #91

Originally posted by di53:

PbbbbbbbbbbbbbTTtttttt

Originally posted by laurielblack:

Originally posted by di53:
I'm goign to behave myself today...

Liar, liar, pants on fire!!!! ;o)

tsk, tsk, tsk..... and just a little while ago you promised to behave yourself today. How quickly we forget.......hehehehee

Ray

05/23/2005 10:21:03 AM · #92

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by di53:
PbbbbbbbbbbbbbTTtttttt

Originally posted by laurielblack:

Originally posted by di53:
I'm goign to behave myself today...

Liar, liar, pants on fire!!!! ;o)

tsk, tsk, tsk..... and just a little while ago you promised to behave yourself today. How quickly we forget.......hehehehee

Ray

Message edited by author 2005-05-23 10:21:47.

05/23/2005 10:30:01 AM · #93

Originally posted by di53:

I'm goign to behave myself today..

Originally posted by rex:

Originally posted by di53:

They gave us the option to turn of signatures. If you dont like the signatures, turn em off.

Which is what I have done.

And this is so true and it is a shame. I will probably miss some good stuff because of the 5%.

??????

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/23/2005 10:33:09 AM · #94

Originally posted by di53:

There are angels on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Originally posted by GeneralE:
How do you know what anyone told Michaelangelo?

Michelangelo didn't WANT to paint the ceiling. The pope basically ordered him to.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

05/23/2005 10:38:58 AM · #95

Originally posted by deapee:

edit: which, by the way, I still haven't seen an 'annoying signature' where are these annoying signatures you are crying about anyway? Give me an example.

From what I have gathered from this site it is not a good idea to point out certain people.

Sonifo

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

05/23/2005 01:20:32 PM · #96

HOLY SMOKES! 17 pictures in a sig? Dang folks..I shut mine off several months ago.

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

05/23/2005 01:33:21 PM · #97

I am chiming in to say that I'm totally with GeneralE and his responses on the thread.

Yes there's an option to turn off signatures but many of us would really appreciate being able to follow the links others provide in their signatures without being subjected to overwhelming and repetitively posted images within those signatures.

I do think that people are using the signature feature more and more to advertise commercial interests elsewhere (whether those commercial interests are on a small scale or a large one). I can live with this if they provide the information in (limited) text-based signatures but don't appreciate the many image links people use instead.

And, irrelevant though it is to this discussion, so many of them are utterly tasteless anyway! ;oP

I would fully appreciate any measures that Drew, Langdon and the SC agree on whether these are to:-
a) reduce abuse of the signature feature (by limiting/ specifying maximum size/ number of image files used and even limiting number of lines for text signatures)
b) offer an additional preferences option to see signatures but exclude images from view
c) remove/ delete/ block signatures that violate a defined set of signature guidelines provided (though I think this solution unfairly places yet another burden on SC so would think the other two would be better)