PDA

View Full Version : Should I keep the Mr. T/Chuck Norris stuff in my sig?



Shade
01-28-2006, 04:49 PM
Firstly, to those who may not know, the second half of my sig is due to a lost bet with IndyToad, and will be gone after the Super Bowl. That's why it's so long right now.

With that said, is there enough interest in my Mr. T/Chuck Norris quotes to keep them in the sig? I've had a few people tell me they love reading them every day, and I enjoy putting new ones in every day, but I don't want to annoy ppl with the long sig if most ppl don't really care for it.

Los Angeles
01-28-2006, 05:52 PM
I have sigs turned off.

Sorry. :blush:

Gyron
01-28-2006, 06:01 PM
If you take off the peyton thing, then the others wouldn't be so bad.

dannyboy
01-28-2006, 06:32 PM
There's no such thing as too much Mr. T

SoupIsGood
01-28-2006, 07:06 PM
:tongue:

Shade
01-28-2006, 07:26 PM
:tongue:

:finger:

I should have added "Any votes by btown and SIG will not be counted because they, in fact, do not count." :tongue:

Raskolnikov
01-31-2006, 10:23 AM
You should keep them. They are very funny.

bread
01-31-2006, 01:48 PM
Please keep them both! They are my daily chuckle.

Since86
01-31-2006, 01:51 PM
KEEP THEM!

18to88
02-05-2006, 06:56 PM
I'm sorry but you have the most annoying signature I've ever seen in a message board. The "rules" say you have to keep it under 130 px in height when yours is well over 900 px, 7 times the limit. It is so annoying to see that thing everytime. I turned off signatures so I don't see it but I wish I could see other signatures. It's not even funny. Sorry, just telling the truth.

Hicks
02-06-2006, 10:31 AM
Get rid of the pictures so it's not so huge, but keep the daily updates.

Since86
02-06-2006, 12:30 PM
I'm sorry but you have the most annoying signature I've ever seen in a message board. The "rules" say you have to keep it under 130 px in height when yours is well over 900 px, 7 times the limit. It is so annoying to see that thing everytime. I turned off signatures so I don't see it but I wish I could see other signatures. It's not even funny. Sorry, just telling the truth.

Rules also sipulate against avatars such as your's but you have that one.

If you're going to be such a goodie-two-shoes, then maybe you should look in the mirror.

Sorry, just telling the truth.

18to88
02-06-2006, 12:48 PM
Rules also sipulate against avatars such as your's but you have that one.

If you're going to be such a goodie-two-shoes, then maybe you should look in the mirror.

Sorry, just telling the truth.

It doesn't say anything like that in the rules but nice try. If you didn't know, they are Pacemates.You'd see that at any Pacers game. How am I being a goody two shoes? I was just saying it was annoying. Really though, nice try.

Shade
02-06-2006, 01:10 PM
Is that any better for anybody?

Shade
02-06-2006, 01:12 PM
I'm sorry but you have the most annoying signature I've ever seen in a message board. The "rules" say you have to keep it under 130 px in height when yours is well over 900 px, 7 times the limit. It is so annoying to see that thing everytime. I turned off signatures so I don't see it but I wish I could see other signatures. It's not even funny. Sorry, just telling the truth.

Since the bet with Toad is officially over, my sig has been significantly trimmed. I really like the pics, so I moved them closer together to shorten the sig further. If it's still anoying ppl, LMK and I'll try to modify the pics into my avatar or something.

Hicks
02-06-2006, 01:57 PM
It's better.

Since86
02-06-2006, 04:19 PM
It doesn't say anything like that in the rules but nice try. If you didn't know, they are Pacemates.You'd see that at any Pacers game. How am I being a goody two shoes? I was just saying it was annoying. Really though, nice try.

It's as much of a rule as sig sizes. We've had stickied threads talking about cleaning up avatars, and getting more to safe for work pictures.

One thread on the topic.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13733&highlight=avatars

Second thread on the topic.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13717&highlight=avatars

Third
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13693&highlight=avatars

And here's the actual rules thread where it mentions it.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8761&highlight=avatars

7. Keep the avatars and signatures reasonably sized.

There is an option to disable avatars and sigs but that doesn't mean that those of us who would prefer to see them want to wade through miles of crap in your sig every time you post or have your avatar breaking the page so it scrolls. If it's too large, somebody will say something. Please listen.

On topic, if you find someone else's avatar or sig that is not safe for work, PM an Administrator. Chances are it hasn't been seen yet. I have and will continue to ask someone nicely to change it and explain why. If it's something completely over the line then you may find it changed for you. That's the breaks I guess. Just use some common sense.




My employer wouldn't like my looking at sites with model's dressed that way, and I doubt it would change just because she's a pacemate.

If you don't want to be called when you push the rules, don't point other people out.

Pig Nash
02-06-2006, 04:35 PM
Is my avi ok? Is a cartoon woman's back ok? I really don't know.

18to88
02-06-2006, 05:47 PM
It's as much of a rule as sig sizes. We've had stickied threads talking about cleaning up avatars, and getting more to safe for work pictures.

One thread on the topic.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13733&highlight=avatars

Second thread on the topic.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13717&highlight=avatars

Third
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13693&highlight=avatars

And here's the actual rules thread where it mentions it.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8761&highlight=avatars

7. Keep the avatars and signatures reasonably sized.

There is an option to disable avatars and sigs but that doesn't mean that those of us who would prefer to see them want to wade through miles of crap in your sig every time you post or have your avatar breaking the page so it scrolls. If it's too large, somebody will say something. Please listen.

On topic, if you find someone else's avatar or sig that is not safe for work, PM an Administrator. Chances are it hasn't been seen yet. I have and will continue to ask someone nicely to change it and explain why. If it's something completely over the line then you may find it changed for you. That's the breaks I guess. Just use some common sense.




My employer wouldn't like my looking at sites with model's dressed that way, and I doubt it would change just because she's a pacemate.

If you don't want to be called when you push the rules, don't point other people out.

The only way that breaks a rule is if you say it is not safe for work, I can't believe you honestly think that is not work safe. They are wearing slightly less than all these pictures of Pacers players showing off arms and legs. You made way to big of a deal out of this. First it had nothing to do with. Second I was just saying that I thought the length of his signature was annoying, which in case you didn't notice was the subject of the thread. I didn't start a new thread over it or anything. Those links you posted, especially the last one, make no sense to your argument. You are obviously the only person I pissed off over this so you need to drop it. Shade didn't seem to care and he's the person I was talking to in the first place.

Since86
02-07-2006, 11:31 AM
The only way that breaks a rule is if you say it is not safe for work, I can't believe you honestly think that is not work safe. They are wearing slightly less than all these pictures of Pacers players showing off arms and legs. You made way to big of a deal out of this. First it had nothing to do with. Second I was just saying that I thought the length of his signature was annoying, which in case you didn't notice was the subject of the thread. I didn't start a new thread over it or anything. Those links you posted, especially the last one, make no sense to your argument. You are obviously the only person I pissed off over this so you need to drop it. Shade didn't seem to care and he's the person I was talking to in the first place.


First, I don't care what your avatar is because I have the option to just turn them off all together.

Second, your avatar fits perfectly well with all those threads. There were no nude ones being discussed, but pictures of women in bikinis and such. Those were deemed "not safe for work," and yours goes right along with them.

Third, your the one that brought the rules into it, to justify your argument, which went beyond your personal opinion. I can't say your opinion is wrong, because it's your opinion. But when you want to bring in the rules factor, that is set for everyone, your open to the same criticism.

And BTW I had an avatar that showed even less skinned and was deemed inappropriate.

heywoode
02-07-2006, 11:41 AM
Do you really think you could disrespect Mr. T and Chuck Norris by eliminating them from you sig? Mr. T would punch you into tomorrow, and into Chuck Norris' trailer. Chuck would then roundhouse kick you back to the 80's where you would be forced to wear parachute pants and have a mullet, or the Kevin Bacon/Footloose hair.

Don't do it man, don't do it.

Keep them both.

18to88
02-07-2006, 11:43 AM
First, I don't care what your avatar is because I have the option to just turn them off all together.

Second, your avatar fits perfectly well with all those threads. There were no nude ones being discussed, but pictures of women in bikinis and such. Those were deemed "not safe for work," and yours goes right along with them.

Third, your the one that brought the rules into it, to justify your argument, which went beyond your personal opinion. I can't say your opinion is wrong, because it's your opinion. But when you want to bring in the rules factor, that is set for everyone, your open to the same criticism.

And BTW I had an avatar that showed even less skinned and was deemed inappropriate.

I asked Hicks if it was inappropriate and here is what he said:

"Not officially. If many avatars stick around for long with girls on them (yours is pretty tame, I'm more thinking of when their wardrobe is closer to bikini or whatnot), I end up having to ask for them to be removed because I want this place safe for work/school.

Hope that clears that up a little bit."

So you are wrong. Just give it up.

Since86
02-07-2006, 12:10 PM
I asked Hicks if it was inappropriate and here is what he said:

"Not officially. If many avatars stick around for long with girls on them (yours is pretty tame, I'm more thinking of when their wardrobe is closer to bikini or whatnot), I end up having to ask for them to be removed because I want this place safe for work/school.

Hope that clears that up a little bit."

So you are wrong. Just give it up.


:laugh: :laugh:

It's just about like the sig sizes. He really doesn't care all that much when it's one or two people, but when you start getting up there in numbers, or someone just goes nuts with the size, then it becomes a problem.

If you can't see the corolation, well then your hopeless.

BTW, if want to get into quoting Hicks here's his thoughts on another posters avatar that he did tell to take it down.

It's in line with what I'm talking about, yes.

I won't call it "bad", though. Needs to go.
Notice he didn't want to label it "bad," but still came to the conclusion that it needed to go?

mugsy27
02-07-2006, 12:12 PM
dont forget...nice try though.

btw...im in the bring back Chuck (even though I > Chuck) and Mr T camp!