The other day I noticed several people with animated gifs in their sigs. I figured it was OK, since a few others have had theirs up for awhile. Not 24 hrs later, mine was taken down. Do some members have special permission to use animated sigs? It's no big deal & I could care less if my sig is animated or not, but I would think that it would be a rule for everyone & not just me. What gives?
I'd imagine it's the same reason we can't have animated avatars... http://forum.grasscity.com/general-feedback/211581-gif-avatar-support.html
Nono, I realize that & respect that decision, but shouldn't it be universal throughout the members? I've seen quite a few who have huge animated sigs. Listen, I don't want to raise a big stink about this & get people in trouble for their sigs, but I was just curious why it isn't a 'blanket' rule? Why do some have that? Let's just forget it.
It's a rule for everyone. However, we have to see the signatures to remove them. That's why it's good to report things that are in violation of the rules, as TB said, so that some won't think that others have special permissions. The rules for signatures are as follows: Signature Limits: All signatures should not exceed the following size limits and you can't have both text and images. Text Signatures: 4 lines normal size OR 8 lines small size and up to 90 chars per line. Font sizes above 2 are not allowed. For images in signatures: 1 image up to 300 pixels wide, 125 pixels tall and 20k in size. If you don't adhere to the size regulation for signatures, then your signature will be deleted. While we're on it, you can't use your signatures for advertising either. You can link to your grow journals and to sites of reform and such, but you can't advertise your own sites or money-making ideas/sites. No links to porn, either. Basically, the rules of the City apply to signatures too which only makes sense. Also, if you're going to use a quote from someone's post, then you can't have a pic with that. The quote counts as text.