Discussion of the Rules Nobody Finds Silly. [Edited]

[^_^]

I agree with you, nobody.

[~xpr'd~]

my idea: the silly section back

[Marinus]

blah

You and your silly "downhill thread" pictures.

Well, I don't like the annoying flashing avatar, but I do like the "downhill" picture! And I agree; this topic is going to be pretty messy, so maybe Patrick will use his scissors again.

Some of you mean this? :
(picture)

I think that's a funny picture. No need to use scissors.

I've noticed a lot of stuff in off-topic that's against the rules with nothing done about it.

Well, so you are talking about rules?! And what about rule 5?

(5) Other Files/Images
You are welcome to use an image in posts and in your signature or avatar. However, we ask that you do not over-use images. Remember that (i) they add to the size of the overall discussion board, and will slow it down over time, (ii) they are slow to download for users without high-speed internet connections, and (iii) they can affect the readability of threads if too many images are present.

The following rules are in effect:

a. Signature or Avatar Images
Please use either a signature image or an avatar image, not both. If you use
(i) an Avatar Image: this image/animation can be 120x120 pixels large. You may still use a single line of text, but no images or multi-line text for your signature.
(ii) a Signature Image: Please ensure that your signature image/animation are up to 120 pixels long (i.e. vertical). You are also limited to a single line of text before or after the image, but no avatar image or multi-line signature text.
(iii) no Image: if you use neither avatar nor signature image, your signature may be up to three lines of text long.

b. Images in Posts
Do not use more than one image in your post, and keep them on the smaller side for improved readability. The exception for this rule is the "Off-Topic" area of the forum. Here you may post several images and larger images in each post.

As far as I can see your 120 x 120 avatar plus the one line Chinese letters are exactly the limit. Which means that the 581 x 159 Higurashi picture is completely against the rules.

[Nobody]

NOT THIS RULE AGAIN. *faints*

[DEEMAN223344]

ENOUGH OF THAT RULE. WE HEARD IT THE FIRST TIME.

[Marinus]

.. *faints*

Perfect!

I'm not the one who started talking about rules, Tyteen and Qloof did. (Oh BTW, is there any rule about unnecessary Caps Lock use? )

Actually I don't care about rules at all. I only care about that one person is not annoying to other people. And those very big or very flashing pictures are annoying me very much. So please do me a favor.

Edit: Oh and I almost forgot: (Deeman) Is there maybe a rule about unnecessary quoting someone else's post (more then 50 lines) and only writing about 4 lines of Wefight pretty much nonsense?

As I said I think it's not about rules. But since some people have a different opinion, I wish there were also such rules. (Caps lock and quote)

And Patrick, I hope you're still reading this topic now and then; If there are some of your rules which are not taken seriously by some people and you do nothing about it, I think none of your rules should be taken seriously. What do you think?

[~xpr'd~]

@rule; He even said it himself: (not exact quote, idk what topic) He made those rules so constrictive because he didn't want huge signatures or avatars. If you can only have a signature image the same size as your avatar, what's the point? Just use it as your avatar.

I personally think 500x200 should be the max sig size with a 120x120 avatar :V

[Marinus]

Therefore I asked it Patrick; not you XPR. The only thing I've asking to you is: Please do me a favor and change that avatar into something more quiet, something less hurting my eyes. (which may have nothing to do with any rule) If you don't want to do that, it's your decision. But please don't bother me with your opinion about ridiculous rules then.

Maybe you've noticed that I only talked about rules to those people, who talked about rules themselves first. It's not about rules. It's about not bothering each other. And if people only are bothering other people in one topic, it shouldn't be a big problem. Other people can choose not to read that topic. But if the bothering things are in someone's avatar or signature, other people simply don't have a choice.

[tyteen4a03]

If you don't want to do that, it's your decision. But please don't bother me with your opinion about ridiculous rules then.

I find the about 2 statements not related to each other.

Anyways the point: The rules were set in 2005 and then was never changed. At that time broadbands were still not very popular, so Patrick set up that rule to ensure speed of viewing the forum. Now it's 2010, broadbands everywhere, so the original idea behind the avatar/sig rules does not make sense to most of us anymore.

Currently at 3.studIo we recommend a 500*300 signature with a 150*150 avatar. The avatar rule is strict, but a little bit over 500*300 is not a problem. Should be good for this forum as well (sigs can be 500*200) since the layout of post display is the same.

[Marinus]

I find the about 2 statements not related to each other.

Then I don't agree with you. I'm talking about things which appear around each of someone's posts, pulling the reader's attention from the things which really matters (The text written in the post), to the things appearing around each post, every time again, especially big and/or flashing pictures, no matter if they are in the avatar or in the signature, which makes it harder to read the text.

Sort of the same way as if you're reading a book, and someone is shining with a flashlight in your face. Or you're watching a movie or listening to music, and there is every time those annoying commercials. So I'm not talking about the speed of the internet connection, only about:

(iii) they can affect the readability of threads if too many [big or flashing] images are present.

(blue text added by me)

That the rules never changed since 2005 means that they either still should be followed, or must be removed, otherwise those are lousy rules.

That you in your forum allows members to have big avatars and big pictures in their signature, has nothing to do with this forum. Those are two different forums, different members (partly), different administrator, and different rules.

Also I think it's impossible to make rules which prevent each bad or annoying situation. Therefore I said it's not all about rules.

Therefore I would like to ask all of you, and especially to XPR and Qloof: Please don't make the things which appears around each of your posts, bigger, or more "attention-pulling", then what you say in the post itself. (rules or no rules)

[Nobody]

The thing is, I personally am not bothered by them, big images even less so than animated ones. For a signature, you can always make sure it's offscreen before reading. For an avatar... use duct tape on your screen to hide it?

[tyteen4a03]

So I'm not talking about the speed of the internet connection, only about:

(iii) they can affect the readability of threads if too many [big or flashing] images are present.

(blue text added by me)

That the rules never changed since 2005 means that they either still should be followed, or must be removed, otherwise those are lousy rules.

This is turning into a personal opinion so I will not be able to comment.
BTW vBulletin, IPB, etc have an option to prevent signatures and avatars showing when viewing a thread. (yes, maybe it's another reason why we should switch?)

That you in your forum allows members to have big avatars and big pictures in their signature, has nothing to do with this forum. Those are two different forums, different members (partly), different administrator, and different rules.

A quotation of 3.studIo rules is a reference or more like, a suggestion of what the rule should become in my mind.

My conclusion: It's all about personal opinions.

[Marinus]

Duct tape, that's the solution! That I didn't think of that earlier!

My conclusion: It's all about personal opinions.

Yes, like almost everything in life. (in my opinion )

[tyteen4a03]

Duct tape, that's the solution! That I didn't think of that earlier!

My conclusion: It's all about personal opinions.

Yes, like almost everything in life. (in my opinion )

I can also write a psuedo computer-based duct tape which will allow you to turn avatars and signatures off when viewing a thread if you want - I will see what I can do.

No, by computer-based duct tape I don't mean they will stick on your screen forever.

[Marinus]

Thank you very much for offering that, but that's not really needed. It's only a small part of all avatars/signatures, which is bothering me.

I think avatars/signatures can be also useful, when I quick scroll a page, searching for someone's post, an avatar is mostly the first thing I recognize, before reading the username. So it's not my intention to hide all avatars and signatures.

If it's bothering me too much, I can always move the browser-window a bit beyond the edge of the screen, but I hope that wouldn't be necessary.

[tyteen4a03]

Thank you very much for offering that, but that's not really needed. It's only a small part of all avatars/signatures, which is bothering me.

I see what you mean.

Can't comment anymore, I will wait for Q/xpr'd's response.

[Qloof234]

The only reason the signature/avatar rules existed was because some people were still on slow connections then. We're in the year 2010, and that's not as much of a concern. Plus, the only rules being enforced I've seen lately is MS deleting any topics that count as spam. Nothing else.

The reason people still have signature images and avatars like me or something is because MS hasn't enforced the rule about it... like, at all in the past year or so. If it's so opinion-based about flashy or big images, then everyone's opinion counts, and it's mine that as long as the image doesn't take up half the screen it doesn't matter. I've seen forums that have signatures going on for almost four times as long as the post itself.

The main difference between those forums and this one is that this one is severely outdated and doesn't have the option to deactivate seeing others signatures.

[tyteen4a03]

Doesn't give you a reason to not follow the rules.

[~xpr'd~]

They're not enforced, and some even have thought that they were nonexistant.

Until MS does something about it, I'm not going to follow them since the reason they were made is irrelevant now.

read: talking about some, not all

[Marinus]

The only reason the signature/avatar rules existed was because some people were still on slow connections then.

Thanks for answering. But, if you would be right, will you please tell me what reason (iii) means?

(iii) they can affect the readability of threads if too many images are present.

The reason people still have signature images and avatars like me or something is because MS hasn't enforced the rule about it...

Like: As long as there's no police nearby, you can break every rule you want. Right?

I think that's only one of the reasons. Another reason can be that someone doesn't care about rules, so they decide to break them.

As for me, although I don't care that much about rules, I try not to break them much. But I think if you break a rule yourself, you shouldn't be taken very serious, when you talk about other people who also break some rules. I think that's what James tried to say.

**********

XPR, many thanks for changing your avatar. I've no idea what it's supposed to be, but I like it.

About the big pictures in signatures; I think wouldn't make sense if I said much more about it. Let's wait if Patrick will answer.

[Qloof234]

Signatures affecting the readability of threads means if they're too long, e.g. a huge (vertical) image.

The reason MS hasn't been enforcing the signature rules... IIRC, he said it was defunct now in another thread a while back. I can't remember if he did or what it's called, but I do recall something to that effect. If the rule is still active, then I will remove my signature image, but until MS officially announces that, as far as I'm concerned, it is defunct.

[Marinus]

So that means the connection-speed was not the only reason, isn't it? And indeed, what's too big or not, depends on personal opinion.

I find it a bit strange there are more people who say that Patrick said the rule is no longer in use, but no one remembers where or when. Also that, in case it's true, he didn't remove that rule. And that you only will remove if he official announces that the rule is still active, while he didn't officially announce that it's not active.

Anyone can say: "I remember that he said ...... , but I don't remember when and where." isn't it?

*********

Patrick, if the rule is really no longer active, will you please remove it, to prevent further confusion in future? But rather keep the rule.

[Marinus]

It took a little research, but I found 2 posts about it after 2006. (searching for signat* AND rul* by midn*)

http://pcpuzzle.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... %2A#228926

(About Avatars: the point of the original rule was to not have excessive signatures with big images. It can be revisited, if needed).

I take "revisited" as: We can talk about it if we should change that rule. Apparantly it hasn't been changed.

http://pcpuzzle.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... %2A#252858 (about 1 month ago)

Please fix your signature according to the forum rules.

I think that means there's still a forum rule about signatures.

[Qloof234]

Wasn't that because he had a huge or offensive signature? I believe it was something to that extent at any rate.

[Nobody]

Yes. There were two incidents like that, one was offensive and the other huge.

BTW, we generally half-obey the rule:

You can have one line of text and a signature image, or three lines of text, regardless of if you have an avatar or not.

[tyteen4a03]

Wasn't that because he had a huge or offensive signature? I believe it was something to that extent at any rate.

Yes, it's about ^_^ having an offensive signature.

[Midnight Synergy]

The main point of the original rule was (a) download speed and (b) readability of posts. Point (a) applies less these days (although many folks - especially international - are still on dial-up), but point (b) is still important to me. Large signatures, very flashy images and avatars, are just plain distracting and ugly. My sizing restriction is tough, but my feeling was that I should be stricter with the official rule and let by some minor deviations (like a police officer not stopping someone doing 58km/h in a 50km/h zone).

So... the point remains to please keep avatars/signatures as small as possible. If someone uses 4 lines of text instead of 3 (or whatever), I really don't care. I do (and have asked for removal) if someone puts tons of quotes in or very large or very flashy images.

(BTW, I meant to also post a second topic with a suggestion on how to deal with the larger problem of the general quality of the off-topic forum, but as usual it got late and I'm tired - I'll try again tomorrow).

[Marinus]

Thanks Patrick.

...... If the rule is still active, then I will remove my signature image.......

Eh... did you say when?

[tyteen4a03]

Conclusion: Just don't go too far.

[Marinus]

What do you mean with "going too far"?

I just took his own words. There's an expression in Dutch: "Een man, een man, een woord een woord.", which means such as: Do what you've promised.