Jeff pwns all. =)

And for those past Jeff-doubters out there, IN YOUR FACE!

Hehe.

There were doubters? He's really great at what he does.

kryo rocks too.

i agree with that

Thank you for the kind words; it means a lot to me. <3



*New smilies yay!*

Agreed! Jeff is awesome! :DDD


And you know, in the past, there was a former moderator (xanga/design staff) who helped a lot around the forums, but she submitted hardly any skins. She was a wonderful moderator and helped out a lot. Winnie is like this as well. :]

It's almost like implying that only members who've submitted a bunch-load of skins are the ones that deserve the spot. Or well, that's how I see it...

Welcome to 1997! Enjoy your stay! Are you on your macintosh? Hey I'm going to the movie theatres to check out this new movie Titanic! Or maybe I'll watch Men In Black!

but big ups to jeff he is a good mod

Titanic was out in 1998.

^

no it wasnt...

steven was right.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0120338/

ps: your sig is over the vertical limit of 300 pixels. thanks!

Don't mean to make a big fuss over nothing, but are you referring to Sammi's sig? If so, are you judging by this:
[attachment=13334:attachment]

Or this:
[attachment=13335:attachment]

I'd go by the first one, since that's what we would do if it was just an image, and 304 px isn't that much over since most of it is text.. But if she really wanted to keep it under 300 all she'd hafta do is get rid of that last line break. *shrug*

either way it is still over 300 pixels. lol

and i was referring to the second diagram because there is a linebreak before the start of the image, and that should count towards the total signature length. notice how your sig and my sig both do not have an extra linebreak before the start of the signature, and yes, 304 pixels is still over 300 pixels. lol

Oh honestly, 304 is not significantly enough over 300 for it to make a damn bit of difference, for a mod or otherwise. Rounding. Seriously, Steven, use common sense and don't be a complete pain in the ass

rules are rules right i dont think even moderators should be above the rules like i remember once i had to change my 302 pixel sig nahmeen


lol funny because lots of moderators complain about my topic titles and the decorations i use evne though there is nothing in the rules that says that i cannot use those. but signatures over 300 pixels are against the rules right? have a safe weekend!

It's not a matter of mods being above the rules. No rational person should have a problem with 304 being over 300. I I get 99.8% on a paper, I'm going to consider that 100%. If I get 100.3%, I'll do the same, not think it's some sort of huge number. And people only complain about your topic titles because they stick out and that's bothersome, not because it's against the rules. Once again, common f**king sense, Steven.

ight then why did i get a PM telling me to change my 302 pixel sig.. now that was OD.. and 320 to 300 is NOT 99.8 to 100.. her sig is 330 pixels not 300.. and it is just a simple case of reducing the font size down one number.. not that difficult

ps : why you gotta be so hostile?? you mad??

I have to agree with Steven on this one. Yes, I agree that any sensible person wouldn't give a rat's ass but rules are rules. There's got to be a cut-off somewhere.

302, not 320. 320 would actually be a problem. I'm not saying that she shouldn't do it, I'm saying that it doesn't actually matter regardless. This isn't hostility, either.


That's a completely contradictory statement. Sensibility should always take priority over rules, because rules should be based on sensibility. I don't see any logical reason why I shouldn't be able to chew gum during school if I don't do something stupid things like stick it under desks, so I don't follow it. Some rules are mainly guidelines; this is one of those rules, to an extent.

HER sig is 330 pixels long vertically.
MY sig was 302 pixels long vertically.


ok tweeak, this rule is completely subjective and under your discretion. i get it

Wait, no, I thought it was 304

I won't fight for 320. See, there is a line. It doesn't have to be perfectly well defined.

And that's not what I was saying either, and you know it.

Jusun has had to edit out my sig/avator atleast 5 times now. I feel special.

Anyways, I feel that 302 or 304 doesn't need to be edited out. I interpret the sig rule as if your sig is horribly and annoyingly taking up space it needs to go. But since the rule is a rule (and now we have bylaws and all that official word for word stuff) anyone can call anyone out about the 300px rule. 301 would have to be edited out if someone called shananigans about it.

And I really wouldn't have a say for horizontal now, because the left alignment is here to avoid entire forum thread streches. But since Jusun edited my sig that was too wide for cb3, I guess things that stretch the board should be edited out.

I don't really care that my statement was completely contradictory; rules are rules. There is a cut-off. That's the whole point of the rule, to give people a clear cut idea of what's acceptable and what's not. If we give leeway to one member, then we'll be expected to give leeway to another member for another rule.



That's just your opinion. If we choose to be lenient with some members with one rule and not with another, then the offending members can always say "This rule's only a guideline! So what if I break it a little?"

no, actually i dont know it.

who is to determine whether 304 pixels is allowed and 306 is not? should the new rule be a 310 pixel limit? then what if somebody has a 312 pixel signature? if you are pulled over for going 28 on a 25 mph road, the excuse "i dont see any logical explanation why i should not go 28" will land you a ticket. sensibility should take priority over rules? who is to decide what is sensible? would it not be easier just to keep your signatures under 300 pixels (which is not directed to sammi which i understand has not even responded to this post since)?

There is no point in turning into a dictatorship over 4px. Period.

All rules are different. I quite honestly do not believe that "rules are rules," because nothing in the world is that definite. Obviously some cannot be broken at all, but there are some areas where a certain amount of leniency needs to be given. With discretion. I have faith that the mods and most of the members know when they have completely overstepped the line, because they know proper discretion. If you genuinely feel that 4px over the limit vetically is actually a problem, then I can't support that at all. I agree with Jeff's post entirely.

And Steven, I'm perfectly well aware it's not up to me to determine things. But the fact remains that the world is not black and white. There will always be gray areas. Without those, it'd be boring as hell. Discretion. Discretion discretion discretion. This is a quality leaders and authority in general need to possess, becuase if one feels the need to stress over every minute misdemeanor, everyone would rebel. Humans could not survive without rules, but at the same time, it's against our nature make them non-negociable. Do I think Sammi should fix her signatue? Yes. Do I think an admin needs to take it upon themself? Absolutely not. If it's actually 320, not 304 and she didn't change it, then yeah. but as it is, there's no point.

If four pixels is going to cause this much trouble, then all she needs to do is take out one of those line breaks, particularly the first one.

But yes, from the part where her signature begins (the top of the image) to the part where it ends (the bottom of the link) is 304 pixels. From the dotted line which divides the post from the signature to the part where the color changes is 330 pixels. I go by the first one, because if someone was to have like a 500x300px image then the second example would add on another 20-something pixels, right?

edit// Oh, and I'm getting the measurements from the pictures I posted a few posts up. I used a firefox extension to get the pixel height.