Leaderboard Extra
Images Removed?

Forums - General Chat - Images Removed? 

17th October 2005 19:03  #1

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Images Removed?
I've noticed that many signatures now have a message from one of you guys, with some new restrictions. Now, I'm not complaining or anything, but perhaps we can get a list of what is approvable now, so we won't get in trouble in the future? Very Happy

17th October 2005 19:16  #2

Mal Webmaster Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 1,290
Just had a bit of a mad signature cull, been planning to do it for a few weeks.

Only three rules:

- Signatures should be no larger than 400 pixels wide and 200 pixels high
- They should not be animated
- Must be suitable for a family audience

The last two were added fairly recently.

It's just a way of preventing the signatures getting too distracting, whilst allowing people to view the website from locations like at work.

17th October 2005 21:35  #3

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Sounds mighty fair to me. Mine's just in the ball park. Hope those rules stay the same, come DVDActive.

17th October 2005 22:45  #4

Adrian Senior Member Join Date: September 2005 Location: United States Posts: 1,305
What does suitable for the family audience mean since most of the pictures I've seen on here don't strike me as "family friendly"!

I guess I am one of the few that wouldn't mind a ban on all images.  I just don't see that they actually add anything to the message boards.

18th October 2005 0:08  #5

- - Senior Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 594
Quote: Originally posted by Malcolm Campbell

Only three rules:

- Signatures should be no larger than 400 pixels wide and 200 pixels high
- They should not be animated
- Must be suitable for a family audience
.


Why are you giving us the choice for sigs but with rules to follow? Confused

18th October 2005 0:14  #6

floyd dylan Banned Join Date: April 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 913
I suppose having an extreme close up avatar of a woman receiving a double entry would be out of the question then?

18th October 2005 0:39  #7

Matt Contributor Join Date: October 2004 Location: United States Posts: 2,113
Just use good judgment when selecting an image for your signature if you choose to have one. A good rule of thumb for what is meant by 'family friendly' is don't use an image that you wouldn't want your grandmother seeing associated with you.

18th October 2005 0:47  #8

floyd dylan Banned Join Date: April 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 913
It is of my grandmother Wink

18th October 2005 1:32  #9

Mal Webmaster Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 1,290
Quote: Originally posted by Danny Boy
Why are you giving us the choice for sigs but with rules to follow? Confused

I do not like defining rules, so there were none before. Any that are added will be kept to a minimum.

18th October 2005 4:30  #10

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
I try to keep my sig's PG-13. That's why you havent seen any of Monica Bellucci naked, rolling around in water Wink

18th October 2005 9:49  #11

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Quote: Originally posted by floyd dylan
I suppose having an extreme close up avatar of a woman receiving a double entry would be out of the question then?


Quote: Originally posted by floyd dylan
It is of my grandmother Wink
LOL!

Thanks Floyd, made my day!

18th October 2005 10:25  #12

Chris Gould Editor Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,115 Send a message via ICQ to Chris Gould Send a message via MSN to Chris Gould Send a message via Skype to Chris Gould
I've found a way to get explicit images onto the site without falling foul of our new Gestapo-esque 'rules'.

18th October 2005 11:46  #13

floyd dylan Banned Join Date: April 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 913
LMAO very funny.

18th October 2005 12:25  #14

Tony DeFrancisco Senior Member Join Date: July 2005 Location: United States Posts: 2,652
Quote: Originally posted by Jonny "Me You"
I try to keep my sig's PG-13. That's why you havent seen any of Monica Bellucci naked, rolling around in water Wink
I was hoping that sometime a sig like that would come by.Wink

18th October 2005 15:46  #15

Adrian Senior Member Join Date: September 2005 Location: United States Posts: 1,305
Maybe I am easily amused, but I think it is funny that we have an admin grumbling about the images.  

Chris, maybe the only thing that was wrong with the previous images was that they were "animated"  Wink

18th October 2005 16:26  #16

Chris Gould Editor Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,115 Send a message via ICQ to Chris Gould Send a message via MSN to Chris Gould Send a message via Skype to Chris Gould
They weren't animated in the traditional sense. It was just two images showing in sequence, not a bird taking her bra off or owt.

I'm not particularly in favour of the swear filter or the new image rules, but they are apparently necessary to keep the site in the black so what do you do?

Maybe one day I'll wn the lottery, then I could have a naked Asian babe yelling fuck off as my sig Wink

19th October 2005 1:01  #17

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Quote: Originally posted by Jonny "Me You"
I try to keep my sig's PG-13. That's why you havent seen any of Monica Bellucci naked, rolling around in water Wink


Dammit Jonny!!! Very Happy

And Chris, fight the power! Love that sig!

21st October 2005 3:20  #18

Keith Member Join Date: June 2005 Location: United States Posts: 221
oh dude, mine showed no t@a. it wouldn't even be considered as erotic.  I've seen more skin on the beach.  I think your going a little extreme in your removals.  Of course my current sig is hopefully approved.  Just a little more strap seen which is purely cosmetic.  Geesh %#=)9*

If she isn't decent, I'll eat Ashl...I mean I'll eat my hat.

21st October 2005 3:22  #19

Keith Member Join Date: June 2005 Location: United States Posts: 221

Quote: Originally posted by Chris Gould
They weren't animated in the traditional sense. It was just two images showing in sequence, not a bird taking her bra off or owt.

I'm not particularly in favour of the swear filter or the new image rules, but they are apparently necessary to keep the site in the black so what do you do?

Maybe one day I'll wn the lottery, then I could have a naked Asian babe yelling fuck off as my sig Wink

Still your showing the split.  Shame on you.

21st October 2005 11:24  #20

Chris Gould Editor Join Date: May 2001 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,115 Send a message via ICQ to Chris Gould Send a message via MSN to Chris Gould Send a message via Skype to Chris Gould
Nowt wrong with a bit of camel toe.

26th October 2005 15:28  #21

Adrian Senior Member Join Date: September 2005 Location: United States Posts: 1,305
Especially when said camel has a painted on shoe.

28th October 2005 1:44  #22

Keith Member Join Date: June 2005 Location: United States Posts: 221
Quote: Originally posted by Chris Gould
Nowt wrong with a bit of camel toe.


I understand, thanks for spreading the vibe.

Quick Reply 

Message Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.
Not Registered?
Forgotten Details?