I think I worded it wrong, what I meant is that it's a bad image - they may think that we don't let users have signatures & avatars.Quote:
Originally Posted by kk.
Printable View
I think I worded it wrong, what I meant is that it's a bad image - they may think that we don't let users have signatures & avatars.Quote:
Originally Posted by kk.
ah, well that makes more sense :P haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
is there a rule for people not being allowed to post links in their signatures? either to the PAPOY thread, or say to a facebook image?
Also hiding images from signatures means they don't see the events which some managers advertise in their signatures. These events could lead to Guests signing up.
Then just block pictures from showing up, if possible...Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
Well they advertise events as images ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Muct
Not really, would prefer it to be PAPOY as that thread is private but people are allowed to post facebook links etc in their signatures.Quote:
Originally Posted by kk.
i guess thats not too different to having an avatar i spose then lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
apart from the fact other members have a choice whether to see it or not :PQuote:
Originally Posted by kk.
Should be allowed links to PAPOY. Its private so its not as if Guests can see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli
thats what he said lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Saurav