DarkstaR
Banned User
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2009
- Messages
- 363
- Reaction score
- 1
I think the allotted 150~ pixels does not allow enough space for most signatures.
For example, my VisualSigs are cut down as small as they can be to allow EQ while still having a comfortable look, and they don't fit right.
I have seen way to many signatures that cannot be fully seen. There is a difference between preventing long signatures, and extensively limiting visual freedom on signatures.
In literally 2 minutes, I found 4 signatures that have been affected by the "cut-off," but they are perfectly legit signatures that in no way would take up too much space or look visually awkward.
http://otland.net/871618-post5.html
http://otland.net/870357-post33.html
http://otland.net/184437-post11.html
http://otland.net/255255-post61.html
Also, it came to my attention that they are only barely cut off. Most signatures are in the 170-200 height range, so I think it would be absolutely perfect for everyone affected by this if you just allow that extra 50 pixels.
Thanks for listening.
//DarkstaR
For example, my VisualSigs are cut down as small as they can be to allow EQ while still having a comfortable look, and they don't fit right.
I have seen way to many signatures that cannot be fully seen. There is a difference between preventing long signatures, and extensively limiting visual freedom on signatures.
In literally 2 minutes, I found 4 signatures that have been affected by the "cut-off," but they are perfectly legit signatures that in no way would take up too much space or look visually awkward.
http://otland.net/871618-post5.html
http://otland.net/870357-post33.html
http://otland.net/184437-post11.html
http://otland.net/255255-post61.html
Also, it came to my attention that they are only barely cut off. Most signatures are in the 170-200 height range, so I think it would be absolutely perfect for everyone affected by this if you just allow that extra 50 pixels.
Thanks for listening.
//DarkstaR