I think when the site was updated the signature limits were changed as well. Not sure if this was done on purpose, or if it was just reset back to some sort of standard limits. Can we get the BB Code alignment ability back? I liked to center things... Thanks. ~ J. J.
Daniel, Thanks for the alignment issue. Any chance the signature line limit could be increased to more than five? Maybe seven or eight? Thanks. ~ J. J.
While we're talking about signatures, how about disabling the [NOPARSE][SIZE][/SIZE][/NOPARSE] tag, in the interest of preventing people from turning signatures into billboards?
This would also be a good change. The issue with 5 lines, is that it's not 5 real-world lines. For instance, my signature right now has four lines, right? A quote, a space and two links. But it won't let me add a third link, even without the space. It uses the code, instead of the result. In-forum links tend to be long.
That would also mean you couldn't make things smaller either. I enjoy having my word count, and having it smaller than everything else. I think that the [NOPARSE][SIZE][/SIZE][/NOPARSE] tags serve a purpose in signatures, and I haven't really seen to many people who abuse it, but I have seen a lot of people who use it well... It doesn't seem like enough of an issue to make an issue out of, and it would just be irritating and limiting to people who were trying to make tasteful sigs. Not trying to be the Devil's Advocate here, but it just seems like something like that would be overly restrictive. It already says in the rules whats allowed in signatures, I don't think it should go any further than that...
I see it abused more often than used considerately. If it could be limited to sizes 1 and 2, I'd be delighted, but I doubt that is possible without more programming than I think would be readily available to Daniel. There are already rules about the number of colors in a sig, and disallowing images in sigs, also in the interest of keeping sigs from resembling the Las Vegas Strip. It's a signature. It shouldn't be more prominent than typical post content.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that the signature should be discreet and respectful, but I don't think that limiting, by force, the available options is the way to go... That's all I'm saying. *shrugs*
The alternative is for the mods to have to step in, and to take the abuse from those members who think they absolutely must have A FLASHY Signature!!! And no, I am not exaggerating.
