The option to put pics in your signature....yes or no? - Page 2

MysticCat · #16 05-12-2005, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crzychx
If GC allowed pictures in signatures or even avatars for that matter I know I personally would never be able to visit GC while at work in fear of inappropriate pictures. There are many people on here that visit GC while at work & I'm sure they wouldn't want to risk it either.

While I think pictures in signatures are typically annoying, any CG user can go the control panel and set a preference for not showing signatures, or even any pictures at all. That would eliminate the risk of inappropriate pictures coming up.

kddani · #17 05-12-2005, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MysticCat81
While I think pictures in signatures are typically annoying, any CG user can go the control panel and set a preference for not showing signatures, or even any pictures at all. That would eliminate the risk of inappropriate pictures coming up.

As I posted in another thread, some people like sigs so they can remember what orgs different posters are in. I don't think there would be a seperate option to not show pics in sigs, but show the sigs

_Lisa_ · #18 05-12-2005, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MysticCat81
While I think pictures in signatures are typically annoying, any CG user can go the control panel and set a preference for not showing signatures, or even any pictures at all. That would eliminate the risk of inappropriate pictures coming up.

Not necessarily for avatars (which is why I mentioned it in my previous statement.) I've been on hundreds of message boards throughout my life & although all of them have had the option to turn off signatures the option to turn off avatars has never been available. I don't want to assume thats it not a possibility but coming to a conclusion from extensive past experiences I wouldn't want to count on that option being available.

RedRoseSAI · #19 05-12-2005, 02:42 PM

1) No
2) Yes

It's not that I don't like look at pictures, but I've actually stopped posting on a few other message boards because people went overboard with pics in their signatures. It was just more crap to scroll through. I like how clean and light GC looks in comparison to some other message boards.

honeychile · #20 05-12-2005, 02:48 PM

I've gotten into enough arguements over the content of people's words - I'm completely against having to do so with pictures, too.

Forgive me for forgetting who originally posted it, but at least half of the people currently on GreekChat would NOT be able to access it at work if photos would be allowed.

MysticCat · #21 05-12-2005, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crzychx
Not necessarily for avatars (which is why I mentioned it in my previous statement.) I've been on hundreds of message boards throughout my life & although all of them have had the option to turn off signatures the option to turn off avatars has never been available.

Turning off avatars is an option on the GC control panel. Don't ask me why, but it is.

But I see (and concede) Danielle's point.

_Lisa_ · #22 05-12-2005, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Turning off avatars is an option on the GC control panel. Don't ask me why, but it is.

LOL. Niiice. Maybe John covering all the bases.

cashmoney · #23 05-12-2005, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kddani
Not to mention that graphic pics are against the TOS that we all agreed to when we signed up for GC.

As we've all seen from various threads, it's not like we can trust our user's better judgment.

Graphic pics aside, what would be the problem? Bandwith is feeble claim against the idea of pics in sigs. I havent been on a site yet that had problems with bandwith due to pics in signatures.

sugar and spice · #24 05-12-2005, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mu_agd
I want to put a huuuuuuge picture of sugar and spice in mine.

Yeah I would consider that an overshare.

kddani · #25 05-12-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cashmoney
Graphic pics aside, what would be the problem? Bandwith is feeble claim against the idea of pics in sigs. I havent been on a site yet that had problems with bandwith due to pics in signatures.

The problem, in my opinion, is that sig pics are annoying as hell, that people would not exercise good taste, that they would clutter up the site, that who wants to see the same picture over and over again. That's my problem with it, and it seems that other's agree. You only got one vote of support so far, and that just may be a vote to try to spite me, lol. So even if votes were to count you be losing

MaMaBuddha · #26 05-12-2005, 03:21 PM

i want to put pictures in my sig...

hmmmm...i would purposely probably find something graphic to put in there. *lol* this is where ignore buttons come in.

we need something to spice up GC. it's been kinda boring lately.

UlChiOCutie26 · #27 05-12-2005, 03:22 PM

I agree MaMa. Totally! I think it would be fun!

_Lisa_ · #28 05-12-2005, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MaMaBuddha
we need something to spice up GC. it's been kinda boring lately.

Spice up GC w/ good conversation, interesting topics, & informed opinions. We don't need images to do that!

AGDee · #29 05-12-2005, 03:30 PM

1) no
2) yes

I find the pics and avatars annoying on things like livejournal, especially the ones that are animated. It's sensory overload to us older non-digital generation people who aren't used to constant flashiness and motion. People get into fights here about the text in signatures, size of it, etc. I can't imagine the conflicts that more graphics would bring.

cashmoney · #30 05-12-2005, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kddani
The problem, in my opinion, is that sig pics are annoying as hell, that people would not exercise good taste, that they would clutter up the site, that who wants to see the same picture over and over again. That's my problem with it, and it seems that other's agree. You only got one vote of support so far, and that just may be a vote to try to spite me, lol. So even if votes were to count you be losing

Hahahaha