Spoilers in signatures

[Seatherny]

the flash is only in use if the video starts playing which is up to the part of the user who clicks it. In that case they would know that they wouldnt be able to run it. I can understand the modeeration, but i just dont understand why people have instantly ruled it out. Spoilers dont add much to the forum, and can give users more flexibility. (like Sex's signature is too big but it looks good but he cant have it )

The standard screen size is 1024px. Taking into account the widths of things, is it possible to increase the max width of the signature to 800px pls

Spoiler tags in signatures just look ugly. It also means moderators have to click them everytime to ensure they follow the rules and because you can change the contents any time, they would have to recheck a persons signature several times by clicking it. Just annoying tbh.

[kk.]

Spoiler tags in signatures just look ugly. It also means moderators have to click them everytime to ensure they follow the rules and because you can change the contents any time, they would have to recheck a persons signature several times by clicking it. Just annoying tbh.

Omg not this argument again. It was used for another argument but I can't remember what. I think it was actually youtube embedding lol. And what's so different between clicking my signature, and another with a video in?

[FlyingJesus]

Yours doesn't have a video in it

tbh for the moderation reason Saurav just raised it doesn't seem to me like spoilers ought to be in sigs - they're prone to being changed at any point without mods knowing (no "last edited:" on sigs of course) and it is pretty minging, not to mention improper use of spoiler tags

[kk.]

Yours doesn't have a video in it

tbh for the moderation reason Saurav just raised it doesn't seem to me like spoilers ought to be in sigs - they're prone to being changed at any point without mods knowing (no "last edited:" on sigs of course) and it is pretty minging, not to mention improper use of spoiler tags

no but I could change it at any time like you said..

[Sammeth.]

I don't want to have to repeat everything that pretty much 90% of the people in this thread have said to you. On top of all those reasons, theres not exactly a demand for it other than... you, really? I'm not one for making an excessive change to the rules to benefit the minority.

[hah]

since we dont have any skinny skins and they are all wider than 700 (im guessing thats why the limit was 700 last time) can sigs be wider or are we gunna get a new skinny skin and not a wide fat one lol?

[Richie]

since we dont have any skinny skins and they are all wider than 700 (im guessing thats why the limit was 700 last time) can sigs be wider or are we gunna get a new skinny skin and not a wide fat one lol?

the non habbo dark skin is a 'skinny skin' we dnt want anorexic skins now do we

[hah]

looks like 10px smaller than the other skins.... hardly slim

[Black_Apalachi]

Which is? I use them to not have big images on show? Which is what this would be used for

To contain spoilers perhaps...? If I use a fork to eat soup, it doesn't necessarily mean that all restaurants in the country should begin serving bowls of soup with just a fork. Basically, you seem to be the only person voicing an opinion in favour of this so it's probably not going to happen.