Graphical sigs

[Tosh]

I understand that graphical sigs were disabled because of the fact that some people would have ridiculously large pics and it would be annoying to read through the forums with huge sigs, and I agree. However I post on an optus gamers forum (http://optus.ausgamers.com - no shameless plug intended ) and we have graphical sigs enabled however we do also have the option in the user control panel where u can choose to browse the forums without sigs. I noticed that this is possible here too. So would it be a problem to allow graphical sigs and for those who want to see them they can, and for those who don't they can simply choose NO to the "Show user's signatures in their posts?" option?? Just a thought

If there's a thread with detail on this subject, then please link me

[d0p3y]

Prolly shoulda posted this in Ideas dude.

The site uses alot of bandwidth as is, and once we get the main site up it'll use alot more no doubt. If we allow images in signatures it's going to use more bandwidth, and make the server slower so in general it's best to just leave them off. Nobody is really fussed about it any more either.

[PranK]

RONIN, last month i think we used around 15gigs of traffic (with a 10gig limit). once the new site is up we may reconsider sig images, but after we see how much traffic will be used.

[XCUZME]

ronin ur already wasting enuf bandwidth with ur worthless posts anyway, why would u want to make christian pay even more with ur bloody image sigs

[Tosh]

hahaha bite me george

Thanks for the explanation dudes