Forum signatures

[#1]

Oldjim has raised the subject of forum signatures, remarking that he is still having to send messages to people about breaching the rules.
I just want to ask why signatures in graphic form are necessary and what people's opinions are about this?
Is it necessary to have images which appear with every reply?  Do people get a bit fed up with seeing the same ones at the end of each response?  Bear in mind that it is the content and quality of the reply that we are interested in, not the appendage.
My own view is that a solution to the problem as outlined by Oldjim is to have no graphic signatures at all then there would be no need to be reprimanding members.
What do others think? 

[#2]

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,218.msg756732.html#msg756732

Quote from: Oldjim

Heads up - change of rules regarding signature and image sizes. As the Plusnet speed tester gives an image of standard size 200 x 100 px and I am getting tired of sending PM's requesting it be reduced to 80 px high we have agreed that the rule can be changed to Quote Signatures should use no more space than 5 lines of standard sized text would, this includes any blank lines and images you choose to use. Image based signatures should be limited to 100 x 560 pixels and a maximum file size of 40kB. The number of standard lines of text have been increased to more or less match the new image size.

Since changing the rules I haven't seen any problems.
Besides I like images in signatures
The other factor is the size of text signatures which used to cause problems as well and changing the rule seems to have sorted that one
By all means discuss image based signatures but don't base it on moderators having to take action

[#3]

and one person had only four lines of long text, but if you only had a standard narrow screen it flowed over to six lines and used to annoy me til I found out why

[#4]

Quote from: poppy

Do people get a bit fed up with seeing the same ones at the end of each response?  Bear in mind that it is the content and quality of the reply that we are interested in, not the appendage.

Yes yes yes!
Unfortunately, we're in a bit of a minority.

[#5]

I agree we should not have images in signatures, they only add to the post length.
Some people may say such images are added by the poster to be amusing or interesting...I beg to differ!  Annoying and puerile springs to mind.

[#6]

I have an image in my signature which is to follow us on Twitter so I'd like to see them stay.

[#7]

@Nick Russell
Actually the signature size with images is very little different to your signature size.
Now if we scrapped all signature images and limited sigs to one line of standard text  

[#8]

Quote from: Oldjim

.... Now if we scrapped all signature images and limited sigs to one line of standard text

Sounds interesting especially if we can limit the number of characters used in that one line

[#9]

Quote from: Chris

I have an image in my signature which is to follow us on Twitter so I'd like to see them stay.

Your image could be replicated fairly easily with text though – you could set a font size that's greater than the signature default so it still stands out a bit.

[#10]

Quote from: Oldjim

@Nick Russell Actually the signature size with images is very little different to your signature size.

Touché....how about this now?

[#11]

Let them stay, Please! I'm making my Million.

[#12]

Oddly I like images in signatures.
Although I did get told off when mine ran at 5 lines long ... could have pointed out it was an image and didn't need to obey the number of lines rule as it was under 80px high 

[#13]

I agree with poppy graphic signatures are not necessary.

[#14]

Is my sig big enough?

[#15]

I believe that  my own signature can be appropriate to many other ramblings I have witnessed