The two WEREN'T. Of course he shouldn't have put 24 in, because inconveniencing others to prove a point is downright Dingo-ish. It DID plainly show that the load time was nowhere near 1.2 MB. His sig was removed incorrectly. If it had been edited to say "don't put 24 images in your sig" you'd be completely right. But it didn't, it stated the sig filesize limits, and so he put up a sig that (still) complied with that.
EDIT: testing baloki's statement now, hold on
EDIT2: Firefox still behaves exactly like I said with the cache off, it only downloads the image once and displays it as many times as needed. Of course, it has to load the image every time you visit the page, now. As for IE, I don't know or care.
