SignaturesFollow

Make it a premium only feature. Let us put our own in, store it like we do our avatars, thus avoiding your [/img] fears . Limit size.


1) It enchances your premium features. More people are likely to subscribe.

2) Having it premium only would avoid most trolling or displays of graphic images. Simple forum moderation would take care of the rest, much like with graphic avatars.

I know it has been abused in the past in the UBB days and that is why we no longer have [IMG] tags. However it is obvious that more and more people are asking for it and by implementing it as a premium feature you provide the service and reap a profit, you also cut out the majority of the problem.

Isn't the limit 120 x 120?

You and I both know I ment signatures.

If image signatures was implemented, it would need to be similar to the avtar system, in that the file was uploaded to our servers. Even with making it premium only there have been enough potential issues with people who get tired of the site and want to issue a grand "F you" to the forums before they leave that people linking to obsene images would be an issue. By making them at least upload it to the server we have a timestamp and IP log to deter things like that. I won't pretend that there have never been inapropriate avatar images, but those that do slip though get dealt with quickly, and if it becomes a problem we can lock down their avatar upload permissions.

There are a fair number of people who do not like image signatures as well. Wether they represent more of a majority, I don't know. A poll on the issue would probably be a good idea if someone wanted to present numbers to us to add strength to their argument...

As to the other part, There are two ways I could potentially see image tags being implemented for general users on the forusm here given the past issues we have had.
1. Enable them only in journals, and only for premium membes.
Once you enter a journal, you are relying on the moderation of that journal owner. I mean, we could go there and moderate stuff, but we don't. We assume that if you are looking in that journal, you want to be there. In that instance, images would be somewhat segregated from the main site, and even if a bad image did slip through the majority of forum viewers wouldn't see it.

2. Have a specific "artwork and screenshot" forum. Enable image tags in there. Would be easier to patrol, but still would have the potential for someone t slip in something obscene.

There are two real arguments though on why I doubt either of those solutions would happen. One would be the godraiden effect. Someone annoyed enough at the site would most likely not balk at using a throwaway paypal account to get premium, and then **** spam the sh*t out of everythign they could find. They have done it with links before, and no matter how quickly we pull them, there is the chance that minors will see them.

The other issue would be the fact that I would be the one most likely babysitting such an img tag enabled forum. One of the downsides of this job is that before you ban someone for posting something really bad, you generally have to verify that it is really bad first...

I have seen things I really never wanted to see that way. Ever. And thats why I would be hesitant to see image tags implemented for the general forum population.

Edited, Apr 29th 2007 12:02pm by Kaolian

You totally fail at reading comprehension lordcecil.

You've convinced me. I will investigate these bad things for you, from now on, just PM me with links. I won't even charge for my services. Hell, I usually have to pay for it.

Are you willing to pay him more for more work? Would you let them add an extra buck a month to your premium* or something for the ability to use [IMG] tags? I wouldn't. [IMG] tags suck. If I wanted to look at pictures of cats with oh-so-funny internet memes plastered across them, I'd go to 4Chan.


*Assuming you had premium

I like the idea of being able to upload an image for your sig... But it probably wouldn't happen.

If this ever did go through, that would be a given.

Personally, I am against the idea of signature images, if only because they tend to be something of an eyesore to me on the various other forums I frequent. And make me wish I could have them go away.

I will agree with Bodhi though, in that I don't think that there will be much in the way of a problem with premium users abusing them, at least, anymore problems than there currently is with avatar abuses.

If we were going to have avatars, I wouldn't see a problem if they were limited to the same size that the current WoW sigs are, and if they weren't allowed to be movable (such as .gifs).

Just my opinion, however.

Perhaps a MMO type approach. 24 hour Mute for first offence, 72 hour mute for second and ban for third.

That or design a feature into it where you can perma ban sigs on an account even if they are premium users.

I think adding the feature in a Journal only type fashion (as mentioned earlier) would be very nice, and could be used as an experiment to see if it would be applicable to signatures in the future. Just a thought