Topic: Sig Test (Read 20863 times)

SpaceDoG · « **on:** August 16, 2006, 02:35:11 PM »

Just testing my signature.

Jobe · « **Reply #1 on:** August 16, 2006, 02:48:44 PM »

/me points at his sig displaying your IP

[Edited on 16-8-2006 by Jobe1986]

Tom65789 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 16, 2006, 03:25:47 PM »

rofl... i love how these seem to display an IP that isnt even mine.. lol DHCP!!

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #3 on:** August 16, 2006, 03:26:30 PM »

I just like the little random comments/images that danasoft does... don't really care about the others though I might change it to not include that stuff.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #4 on:** August 16, 2006, 03:34:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tom65789
rofl... i love how these seem to display an IP that isnt even mine.. lol DHCP!!

Thats got nothing to do with DHCP, you plank.

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #5 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:05:43 PM »

It be da proxy or da NAT!

[Edited on 16-8-2006 by SpaceDoG]

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #6 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:06:47 PM »

Its a transparent cache.

Jobe · « **Reply #7 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:20:36 PM »

Unless of course he uses a router and is looking at the IP of his computer not the IP of his router as seen on the internet. In which case these images display the IP of his router on the internet which is correct.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #8 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:26:45 PM »

In which case he should be shot at, there is a clear difference between a lan ip, and a wan one.

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #9 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:30:36 PM »

I see the IP of my proxy server.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #10 on:** August 16, 2006, 04:31:28 PM »

Yeah.

Camti · « **Reply #11 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:18:39 PM »

My Turn To Test

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #12 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:25:29 PM »

Dear god, I might just have to turn sigs off :p

n00bie · « **Reply #13 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:34:25 PM »

bad boy bad boy .. what cha gonna do ?

Jobe · « **Reply #14 on:** August 16, 2006, 05:48:20 PM »

My sig isnt too bad. I could if i wanted to put my own IP in there too (fully dynamic and always up to date courtesy of dynamic DNS) as this:

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #15 on:** October 14, 2006, 04:54:09 PM »

yay I got my new sig working :-P

Camti · « **Reply #16 on:** January 27, 2007, 03:34:25 PM »

Hmmmmmmmmm..

I cant see my sig, all i see is the [img] tag

[Edited on 27-1-2007 by Camti]

Jan Milants · « **Reply #17 on:** January 27, 2007, 04:37:39 PM »

sigs have been disabled because of abuse.... at the end half the page was being taken by oversized sigs... also affected loading times

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #18 on:** January 29, 2007, 02:47:48 PM »

Yea... that would be my fault

katsklaw · « **Reply #19 on:** January 29, 2007, 04:36:49 PM »

No SpaceDog, it was the fact that they were growing more and more popular and it was getting to the point that all of them combined was occupying a great deal of "real estate" on the page.

It's no one single persons fault.

For the record, sigs are NOT disabled, using IMAGES as sigs is disabled. You are welcome to create a nice text only sig so long as it's not huge.

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by katsklaw]

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #20 on:** January 29, 2007, 06:20:22 PM »

if I could use XML in it I would :-P The only reason for the image is to give my online status on my IRC net ;-)

katsklaw · « **Reply #21 on:** January 29, 2007, 06:49:19 PM »

it's the size height wise that's the problem .. because you'd see people with 2 lines of text and a sig 8-12 lines tall.

If everyone could stick to a small 3-5 line tall sig, the images wouldn't be bad at all and we could consider enabling images again.

------------
1
2 - this is not bad
3
------------

----------------
1
2
3
4 - this is why images aren't allowed
5
6
7
8
9
10
----------------

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by katsklaw]

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #22 on:** January 29, 2007, 08:06:46 PM »

Well I have a smaller less advanced form that merely says online like

compared to

. I think that second is like 520px while the first is like 25 in height.

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by SpaceDoG]

SpaceDoG · « **Reply #23 on:** January 29, 2007, 08:12:12 PM »

Wow it's only 182px in height and 525px in width... took me forever to make though :-P

katsklaw · « **Reply #24 on:** January 29, 2007, 09:15:28 PM »

In my opinion something like this at maximum would be ok:

(old img here)

it's 67px tall and has all the info anyone would care to know about you

Not to mention at 800x600, your 182px sig would take up 30% of the entire screen.

Again, this isn't about you, there are several others that have fair sized sig images as well.

Just used yours as an example.

[Edited on 29-1-2007 by katsklaw]

[Edited on 12-5-2007 by katsklaw]

News:

Author Topic: Sig Test (Read 20863 times)

Camti

Camti

katsklaw

katsklaw

katsklaw