Page 8 of 9
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:04 am
by TLtimelord
K
We know we have a signature problem when my mobile safari crashes faster on this site than social media sites.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:11 am
by zlaker
are people proud of having enormous signatures?
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:30 am
by Circle Guy
zlakergirl357 wrote:are people proud of having enormous signatures?
probably
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:01 pm
by Emral
heh.

Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 5:13 pm
by Zeldamaster12
At least he uses spoilers.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 5:20 pm
by aero
That's where we're at. Shooting for "at least."
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 5:30 pm
by TLtimelord
Enjl wrote:heh.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:26 pm
by Circle Guy
Enjl wrote:heh.

with the magic of spoilers you can make your sig as big as you want
plus there are 2 youtube videos
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 12:27 pm
by Cedur
Opening spoilers doesn't count toward the signature's length in this ranking, right?
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 1:19 pm
by Circle Guy
Supershroom wrote:Opening spoilers doesn't count toward the signature's length in this ranking, right?
No.
If it did, mine would've been on it.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 4:19 am
by Egg
I don't see the problem with big signatures
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 1:17 am
by WindyDelcarlo
Distracting and unnecessary are two big parts of it.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:44 am
by aero
Story of my life.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:33 am
by Gameinsky
Two other things about them signatures: Very few people actually care to look at the videos, huge images etc. in signatures. They can be funny the first time but all they do afterwards is be a burden as some signatures are so big they don't even fit on my 1920*1080 monitor. (Considering that's reasonably big for a resolution, it's insane that signatures are bigger than that)
I'm thankful that Horikawa has made this thread as quite a few people used spoilers and as a result the forums look a lot more clean.
The signature on Knuckle's forums were worse though *shudders*
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:48 pm
by Egg
then why put my signature in a spoiler if nobody bothers opening them. I want everyone to see it
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 2:33 am
by TLtimelord
Gameinsky wrote:Two other things about them signatures: Very few people actually care to look at the videos, huge images etc. in signatures. They can be funny the first time but all they do afterwards is be a burden as some signatures are so big they don't even fit on my 1920*1080 monitor. (Considering that's reasonably big for a resolution, it's insane that signatures are bigger than that)
I'm thankful that Horikawa has made this thread as quite a few people used spoilers and as a result the forums look a lot more clean.
The signature on Knuckle's forums were worse though *shudders*
Quite frankly videos in signatures should be banned.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:56 am
by FireyPaperMario
TNTtimelord wrote:Gameinsky wrote:Two other things about them signatures: Very few people actually care to look at the videos, huge images etc. in signatures. They can be funny the first time but all they do afterwards is be a burden as some signatures are so big they don't even fit on my 1920*1080 monitor. (Considering that's reasonably big for a resolution, it's insane that signatures are bigger than that)
I'm thankful that Horikawa has made this thread as quite a few people used spoilers and as a result the forums look a lot more clean.
The signature on Knuckle's forums were worse though *shudders*
Quite frankly videos in signatures should be banned.
I couldn't agreed more! Signatures should be texts & images.

Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 12:53 pm
by aero
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 12:54 pm
by Cedur
This doesn't work for specific users only. If you could undisplay a specific user's sig (with a click on their profile or something) then we wouldn't have that much of a problem with excessively large signatures.
Re: The Top 100 Scientifically WORST Signatures on SMBX Forums
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 1:21 pm
by aero