Pictures in spoilers.

[Zykorinov]

I would like to suggest that the [img] tag be allowed in spoilers.

[New Spartzerina]

*Checks with both types of spoilers*

EDIT: Works for me...
EDIT2: Are you talking about spoilers in signatures?

[Glen-Rhodes]

EDIT2: Are you talking about spoilers in signatures?

If he is, somebody should mention that images are disabled in signatures.

[Zykorinov]

Yes! I am talking about images in signatures. Sorry, I just realized my mistake while riding home for my Grandmothers.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Why is it banned -___-

[Zykorinov]

Why is it banned -___-

Exactly.

[Bears Armed]

It's banned because sigs are supposed to be relatively small in comparison to the actual posts, and a lot (probably most?) of the images that people would be likely to use would hog too much space.

[Zykorinov]

If you put them in spoilers, that would give people the OPTION of seeing them. See my point?

[A mean old man]

Well, they could create a dimensions limit.

EDIT: In sig pictures, that is.

[Bears Armed]

If you put them in spoilers, that would give people the OPTION of seeing them. See my point?

But could they enable images in spoilers in sigs without enabling images elsewhere in sigs too?
Anyway, if you're willing to require that people click on something to see your images, why not just post your images in a 'Factbook' thread and include links to those posts in your sig?

[The Most Glorious Hack]

Frankly, signatures are a curse, because people always make them too big. Pictures would just make it worse.

[Glen-Rhodes]

But could they enable images in spoilers in sigs without enabling images elsewhere in sigs too?

I'm pretty sure they cannot.

[A mean old man]

...because people always make them too big.

Well, I suggested a possible dimensions limit. There could be pictures in sigs, however just fairly small. Maye not more than one picture, either. I don't really know when I personally would want to use a picture in my signiture, though. I like to keep mine fairly simple. Though there are apparently those that would, based on this thread.

I'm not sure if that would be weird to code, though. I don't know much about code.

[Unibotian WASC Mission]

But could they enable images in spoilers in sigs without enabling images elsewhere in sigs too?

I'm pretty sure they cannot.

Why not a spoiler tag, which imitates the spoiler tag but has in fact the effects of [spolier][img][/spolier][/img] (pardon my spelling ).

[UNIverseVERSE]

No. Pictures in spoilers are still loaded, even if not displayed, and that'll kill people on dialup and similar connections.

[The Violet Goddess]

Another forum that I frequent, Ogame, has that enabled. Look here...

An Example of how cluttered a thread gets if you allow siggy img's...and how slow all the img's make it...

*Hopes reppy doesn't cave a cardiac arrest with all the massive sig's...*

[Reploid Productions]

While I could enable images in sigs, that order came down to [violet] and I from Max himself: No images in sigs, period. A bummer, I know, but in the long run probably for the best considering how regularly I have to go and trim down long sigs as is!

[Insignificance]

So, I can't have a picture in my sig in a spoiler? Aw. I had a relevant picture I wanted to use, too.

[Sedgistan]

You did not need to gravedig this thread to say that.