But the rules don't SAY that.

[Raistlin]

I'd like to point out that Kane's defense of how bandwidth was not taken is the exact same "excuse" cl_out used for the longest time to have his sig appearing normally (the animated gifs he has now) and a mirrored version of it below, totalling by his own count 32k, but 64 according to the "filesize limit" thing you used.

Interesting...

Bleys: the UYFB rule doesn't apply here, 'cause they WERE when they realized that two of the same image would not impact the loading times anymore then one. Well, you could say Kane's sig was taken back down after he put 24 of the same image in his sig, which would kinda apply with the UYFB rule. Ah well.

[Citizen Bleys]

Oh, well, back to not caring.

[Mr. Graves]

That's not complaining.

Ah, cool. Forget I mentioned it. xD BTW, wasn't Lord Krang the brain in that old Ninja Turtles show?

Oh, well, back to not caring.

Yar!

I just felt like making a fire and going camping

Ah, we could still go. lalala. *grabs the marshmellows and walking stick*

[m4tt]

Uhh yes, I think it was. Kishi chose my name so he must of been in a TMNT mood.

[Yamaneko]

Bleys: the UYFB rule doesn't apply here, 'cause they WERE when they realized that two of the same image would not impact the loading times anymore then one. Well, you could say Kane's sig was taken back down after he put 24 of the same image in his sig, which would kinda apply with the UYFB rule. Ah well.

The UYFB rule does not only apply to technicalities, but also to subjective matters, like actions that piss people off.

[MecaKane]

Every forum have unwritten rules that should be understood by everyone. Having an annoying signature being "against" the rules of signature is one of them.

Who's to say what's annoying!
I find people's sigs where they have links to their boy/girlfriend's profile more annoying than most sigs, let alone one that's not meant to be taken seriously, at all.
Of all the MSpaint sigs, crappy poetry sigs, sigs with :chop: or :shoot: in them, mine was the most annoying, I guess.

[Agent Proto]

Well, in terms of annoying the staff, yes.

[Psychotic]

You forgot the countless Eizon advertisings too.

[Baloki]

Or people just dislike you/like winding you up Kane, but hey if your happy moaning I'm all up for popcorn and camp fires

[Shlup]

The situation as I understand it:

1) Someone (I forget who) didn't understand the whole cache thing, and took the sig down.
2) Kane responded innapropraitely, adding the image multiple times.
3) His signature privilages were removed due to this innapropriate response.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, since I missed the whole thing.

[Raistlin]

1) Someone (I forget who) didn't understand the whole cache thing, and took the sig down.
2) Kane responded innapropraitely, adding the image multiple times.
3) His signature privilages were removed due to this innapropriate response.

More or less. Except for the fact that no one's admitting that Kane's original sig wasn't against the rules in the first place.

[Shlup]

I've come to learn that when it comes to Raistlin there is no "admitting" anything. No matter what anyone says, if something you disagree with happened in the first place there is no pleasing you after the fact.

This is probably the best you will get:

There is currently no rule that says staff can remove sigs they find annoying. There was, but it wasn't put back up after the vB3 upgrade; it was overlooked. The reason the sig was removed in the first place was because it was thought to have broken the size rule, which several staff members admit they didn't know about. It remains down because Kane was a brat about it.

[Raistlin]

But Leeza didn't say she found the sig annoying; she said it went over the 50 KB limit rule, which we explained that it did not. Putting in some of staff's arbitrary "cover my ass" rules after the fact doesn't change the original intention.

[Shlup]

I don't think Leeza's even the one who removed it in the first place, is she?

[Raistlin]

I think that's already been covered...