Ryo Chan said:
I would like to see non-abusive examples of how hawking your custom or downloaded graphical content adds value to a discussion on imports vs domestic DVD releases, latest anime in japan or the imminent release of UK Naruto. Frankly the non-abusives sigs add nothing to forum content.
ok very well 3 years ago i was veiwing a forum and i saw this very nicely drawn anime character and suddenly i desided i wanted to see the show.
And how did that add to the discussion? What was the discussion even about? Do you remember? I have no problem with graphical content being added to forums where it is in context. Like adding in graphics of characters or screen caps into threads about:
-Favourite characters
-Favourite anime
-Pimp some obscure/underrated anime threads
Those are always cool. And I participate in image threads regularly (with image warnings in the thread titles) just there hasn't been one lately here that I recall.
Ryo Chan said:
Not really, just answer the question I originally asked and not the one you wanted to answer.
Ryo Chan said:
and don't say admins have no power over external file size's i've seen forums that can modify a 800x600 wallpaper into a 100x75 avatar
Yes, if the site hosts it. Or if the site actively downloads it from the external server and does it
on the fly. These kind of policing activities consume server resources and bandwidth.
But
externally hosted images, especially those hosted on say imageshack.us come straight from that site to your browser bypassing Anime UK News. At best Anime UK News could modify the image attributes so that an 800 x 600 image gets displayed as a 100 x 75 graphic, but the user is still downloading an 800x600 file.
Nobody is crazy enough to have their server download the external image and modify it on the fly. It would be
cheaper to host the shrunken image directly.
Think about how mods are implemented.
Besides it looks like it is easier to block signatures on a per-profile basis than it is to just block image tags from signatures.