At 10/3/06 11:12 PM, Maus wrote:

At 10/3/06 11:09 PM, twessel wrote: They are wide enough, it's the height that's not enough. They must be taller! It's much easier to put in cool pictures rather than just pictures of eyes or whatever.

Use your main account, dude.

Do I have to? I've decided to abandon it, and no one was supposed to know about it, but I accidently posted on the wrong account, so now I want this one.

='[

Lets have real ads for sigs, that would be the best option.

personally i think shorter and wider sigs would be horrible.

yes for wider, no for shorter..

and no animated gifs?
look at my sig, there is nothing wrong with it.
you need gif format because .jpg are harder to match colours and stuff..
this change would make me very upset.

Go along with the new design. Remaking sigs won't be that big a deal.

At 10/4/06 12:00 AM, Kamron wrote:

At 10/3/06 11:56 PM, madknt wrote:
you need gif format because .jpg are harder to match colours and stuff..
this change would make me very upset.

To clarify some of your worries about gif being taken away, quote from LilJim:

At 10/3/06 11:34 AM, liljim wrote:

We're able to discern whether a gif is animated or not, so gifs would still be permitted, even if animated sigs are eliminated in the long run.

oh i see, i think the main point is that no matter what size you make sigs the quality wont change, shorter sigs are even harder to make look good..
and its not like reducing 20 px is going to hide most peoples lack of ability to make something that looks good!
i can see what they are going for in the example that liljim posted, but that picture also shows the tremendous flaws in the idea.
everyone is going to have eyes for sigs!?
80% of the requests in the newgrounds sig makers is for anime chick red sigs..
show me a good sig 40*595 that is red with hot anime chickness and ill be all for this idea.
even though i hate anime chicks.. i dont get it..

As a no sig supporter I feel nuetral about this future adjustment.

Yeah sure, if it's for the good of the site. Don't let my little sig stand in the way of what could be a really sexy change. It's not my site to really have any say anyway, I just come here for the food and drink.

However, the sig clubs might be flooded with sig requests/size requests. That is probably the only backlash that might be very harmful to the userbase.

I wouldn't mind having to make a new sig if i had too

All i know is I'm pumped for the new layout.

GIVE 'ER.

What if instead of putting sigs below the post, we put them under our level icon, allowing for 100x200 sigs or so.

DO NOT SACRAFICE ANIMATED GIFS!!!

they should stay the same. and whaddoya mean i didn't work on this sig?
it took me a week to find and steal and...well forget that last part.

I do believe that this is a great idea on some notes. One of the best things about NG is that the forums don't have horribly large sig pics and signatures overall. On many other sites the sig pics can be huge and the 10 lines of text can drive one mad when scrolling through. Reducing the size vertically and expanding horizontally is good for eliminating the annoyance some signatures can cause.

So the size change is fine, however, I can't support the elimination of animated signatures. Newgrounds has always been a site for flash animation. Having animated sigs seems to match the theme of the site perfectly. The users here animate, that's what the site is here for.

So go for the size change, but allow users to express themselves and practice their animating abilities in their signatures.

At 10/3/06 08:37 PM, DFox wrote: I think he's trying to say that most of the unique hits are people who do not sign up at first, and might sign up later on, but I may be wrong.

It's more along the line of how many people that visit NG don't even create accounts, or even know about them. I never knew that you could vote for flash or that there was even accounts to be made for a few months before I signed up, so saying somebody didn't create an account for a period of time is highly plausible.

Infact, a friend of mine who introduced me to NG didn't even know about the portal untill after I had told him about it.

At 10/3/06 08:40 PM, liljim wrote: Also, the number of people who're going to be affected by this whole change, at most, is about 30,000. Out of well over one million users (most of whom don't have sigs and who don't ever visit the BBS). We're actually dwelling over the smallest of small minorities here.

Now I'm not disagreeing here to be a snotty punk like I was earlier, but there is a flaw here. If the 30,000 users are the only ones who visit the BBS, then it doesn't matter what others think outside the BBS. Some guy who actually sees the forums button isn't going to say "Oh hey, these sigs look really unprofessional!"

It doesn't matter either way to be honest. I say there should be a vote from the BBS, or a few sample pages made with the new look and some new sigs, all made by Stamper of course.

If you did change all the sigs. Everyone would flood into the sig makers asking there sigs to be resized (If there animated)

At 10/4/06 12:55 AM, PacoW wrote: What if instead of putting sigs below the post, we put them under our level icon, allowing for 100x200 sigs or so.

DO NOT SACRAFICE ANIMATED GIFS!!!

That would make the site look like complete shit. I hope to god that never happens.

My god delete every sig on the forum if you can get that new layout out faster JUST DO IT.

Most of my sigs are animated GIFs...and as you can see, many users have animated sigs and are not annoying sigs at all...

Keep the animated sigs, please....

At 10/4/06 02:55 AM, Ozcar wrote: Most of my sigs are animated GIFs...and as you can see, many users have animated sigs and are not annoying sigs at all...

Keep the animated sigs, please....

yeah, exactly. maybe just have some sort of quality control: make it a mod's job? like, if there's shitty garish crap, then just redirect the offender to the ng sm club. or, if it's to offensive, have an option to be able to view/not view sigs, which could be activated in the account options sort of thing.

I said it first!

Well Tom if I can't have an animated sig or a sexually ambiguos sig I'd have no sig at all. Doesn't really bother me because it isn't THAT big of a deal.

I would'nt really mind, sigs arent essential anyway
aslong as the file size stays the same or even increases i'll be happy.

thank god NG actually put's a limit to peoples sigs i hate those forums were's peoples sig image/text takes up most of the page.

At 10/4/06 04:35 AM, wwwyzzerdd wrote: I said it first!

you were on the right track, tom is going in the wrong direction :(
i guess a small price to pay for all the good stuff that is coming with the new layout.

At 10/4/06 01:15 AM, CrimsonEdge wrote:

At 10/3/06 08:40 PM, liljim wrote: Also, the number of people who're going to be affected by this whole change, at most, is about 30,000. Out of well over one million users (most of whom don't have sigs and who don't ever visit the BBS). We're actually dwelling over the smallest of small minorities here.

Now I'm not disagreeing here to be a snotty punk like I was earlier, but there is a flaw here. If the 30,000 users are the only ones who visit the BBS, then it doesn't matter what others think outside the BBS.

That's just it, though. The affected users are only a PORTION of the people who visit the bbs (not the only people to visit it). The 30,000 affected users I mentioned include people who may not have visited the forums for years.

As for the animated sig people, there are even less - around 8,000, give or take.

At 10/4/06 08:22 AM, liljim wrote:
As for the animated sig people, there are even less - around 8,000, give or take.

Whats a sig without snow?

At 10/4/06 08:29 AM, HoboPorn wrote: Whats a sig without snow?

It doesn't have to be moving now, does it?
I'm pretty sure if we disallow animated sigs, you'll have a few angry people, they'll bitch for a bit, and then either leave or get used to it.

Those who actually leave clearly have their priorities as a poster fucked up and wouldn't be missed by me.

In my opinion, I think the animated ones should stay when we switch over.
By looking at this thread, it seems those who want to keep them have a better argument over those who want to see them gone AND are in the majority.

Annoying ones can be dealt with and if the whole notion of removing animated .gifs is purely a aesthetic idea as opposed to one concerned with function then I think we should go with what most people want, and that's to keep them.

At 10/4/06 09:30 AM, Zerok wrote:

At 10/4/06 08:29 AM, HoboPorn wrote: Whats a sig without snow?

It doesn't have to be moving now, does it?
I'm pretty sure if we disallow animated sigs, you'll have a few angry people, they'll bitch for a bit, and then either leave or get used to it.

I didn't say it had to be moving snow, but it's always nice :D...I prefer it as opposed to snow that just sits there -____-

In my opinion, I think the animated ones should stay when we switch over.
By looking at this thread, it seems those who want to keep them have a better argument over those who want to see them gone AND are in the majority.

See how lilim posted that sig, and how it would look? I don't think animation would work in such a tiny width of a sig. I like how they are now :|

At 10/4/06 09:34 AM, HoboPorn wrote: See how lilim posted that sig, and how it would look? I don't think animation would work in such a tiny width of a sig. I like how they are now :|

Sure it will work.
There's all sort of horizontal animation to be had.

Don't be so afraid of change.
People who sign up and become regulars post-revamp will say the same about the new layout if it ever changes. After we all get used to what Tom and the others (and I trust their judgement in things-good-looking) say is a KICKASS and SLICK new design, most of us will probably wilt at the idea of going back to this one.

I know I'd be complaining if for some reason we were going to revert to the layout before this one.

I'd be able to make a new sig failry quickly, but I'd be a bit annoyed at having to change sig size.

I would be extremely annoyed if animation was suddenly disallowed. I spent hours on this sig, and I don't believe it is annoying anyone, and if it is, not to the point of them feeling the need to have it off. I know I would learn to cope with it, but accepting a situation isn't as good as having the better situation, at no real cost.

On the subject of smaller but wider sigs, I don't really like the idea of it. Almost everything one the site would just be an extreme close up of somebodies face, or otherwise hard to tell what it is. I'm all for wider, but one question, if the sigs are made wider, will the maximum filesize be raised? And, will sigs that aren't the maximum length, be centered, rather than to the left?

At 10/4/06 10:01 AM, Kuro wrote: will sigs that aren't the maximum length, be centered, rather than to the left?

id say the best option would be to force sigs to be the full length..
then alignment isnt an issue..
especially if the border is being automatically added to integrate better like in liljims post.