Raise the sig limit!

APE · Post by **APE** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:48 pm

30kb is a pittance! I request that it be raised to 100kb if not more. At 1mbit that would take a whole second to download.

If you're on dialup why don't you already have images disabled?

Covar · Post by **Covar** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:51 pm

agreed. i like the height and width size limits, but the filesize limit is ridiculous.

Juan · Post by **Juan** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:52 pm

Yeah. If dialup users don't like it, they can either adblock it or get some admin (sorry darc) to install some sig hack in the user profile.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:03 pm

imagine loading a post with 20 people with 100k sigs. That's 2mb. Way too much to download just to read one page.

I vote no.

deemoney · Post by **deemoney** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:13 pm

I vote no.

Juan · Post by **Juan** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:15 pm

70 kb

deemoney · Post by **deemoney** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:27 pm

50KB at the most

curt_grymala · Post by **curt_grymala** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:35 pm

Oppressed Peon wrote:imagine loading a post with 20 people with 100k sigs. That's 2mb. Way too much to download just to read one page.

I vote no.

APE · Post by **APE** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:37 pm

Oppressed Peon wrote:imagine loading a post with 20 people with 100k sigs. That's 2mb. Way too much to download just to read one page.

And if those same people exercised the limits of the avatar+sig at their current limits you'd have to load 1080kb. Right now this page only loads 100kb including bits of the forums.

Wagh · Post by **Wagh** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:50 pm

you have just about everythign cached. It's amazing how that works....

Eitherway 1mb is less than 2mb. If anything the limits should be lower but that's not going to happen.

Post by **melancholy** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:05 pm

Absolutely not. 30k has been plenty for years. The sig restriction has almost spoiled me, because now whenever I go onto a forum that does not have any restrictions, I find it almost unreadable. It is amazing what you can do with 30k if you work at it.

Also, I think the avatar filesize should be lowered. If 30k is plenty for sigs, then 15k would be plenty for avatars.

butters · Post by **butters** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:15 pm

Oppressed Peon wrote:imagine loading a post with 20 people with 100k sigs. That's 2mb. Way too much to download just to read one page.

I vote no.

bizzle · Post by **bizzle** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:25 pm

I vote yes.

mankrip · Post by **mankrip** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:49 pm

I voted yes, because:
- Not all sigs will reach the maximum filesize. This doesn't happen now, and won't happen with a slightly bigger limit.
- The limit of posts per page in any topic is 20, but we hardly have posts from 20 different people in the same page, and often some of them doesn't have sigs or avatars.

By the way, I suggest a maximum filesize between 50 and 100 KB.

MulletMan13 · Post by **MulletMan13** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:50 pm

It would be way too much for the poor 56k users... even with caches and the like.

Caboose · Post by **Caboose** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:51 pm

I think it's alright the way it is, but would be nice if it was more of a guideline than an actual rule.

Post by **Roofus** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:52 pm

I vote no for all the reasons already stated.

Covar · Post by **Covar** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:04 pm

MulletMan13 wrote:It would be way too much for the poor 56k users... even with caches and the like.

who is actually on dialup here?

MulletMan13 · Post by **MulletMan13** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:07 pm

Covar wrote:
MulletMan13 wrote:It would be way too much for the poor 56k users... even with caches and the like.
who is actually on dialup here?

Well played Covar.

Post by **melancholy** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:09 pm

Covar wrote:
MulletMan13 wrote:It would be way too much for the poor 56k users... even with caches and the like.
who is actually on dialup here?

Me on weekends. 33.6k even.

Raise the sig limit!

Should the sig kilobyte limit be raised?

Raise the sig limit!