[Snail]

Jeez, all you needed to do was remove the glow tags.

[ShadowGorrath]

Right. Why were there glow tags there then in the first place, huh? You could have had them removed by default, not working in sigs.

If anyone was really suffering cause of it, you could have said so clearly when I first made the sig so. And it worked fine for me when on Opera or IE, so not my problem you can't read it.

[Flipside]

It was an oversight. Fixed now.

[Shade]

And it worked fine for me when on Opera or IE, so not my problem you can't read it.

See, that's where you're wrong. When you post on a forum with an annoying sig, you make it everyone's problem. And when your sig is involved, everyone's problem becomes your problem... as you can see now. Remember that the forum is for everyone, not just for you. Further, the annoyance of glow tags has been brought up on many threads, including this one, yet you did not change your sig.

[Jeff Vader]

And it worked fine for me when on Opera or IE

Didn't work for me on Opera yesterday.

[Flipside]

As Shade says, signatures are your 'advert' for yourself to everyone on the forum, if you want an example of how bad things can get, try looking through things like the X3 Forums. As much as I love the modding work done on that game, the forum drives me mad with one line of post, an Avatar, A siggy, with pictures etc, sometimes you have to spend a good few seconds just trying to find the actual content of the post, and worse still, the thread keeps leaping around as it reformats itself around each new siggy picture loaded etc.

[ShadowGorrath]

Works for me on Opera.

And I can think up of many other more annoying things in this forum than my signature supposedly was.

And, this is the first time I see someone complaining about glow tags.

Ok, fine, I won't post here again, I won't complain about you editing my signature without informing me via PM ( or telling me to do that via PM; I would have reacted normally and edited my signature myself, if an admin PMd me of that and officialy requested me to change my signature, instead of acting this way ).

[karajorma]

Fine, removed my signature entirely. Happy now? Abusing your damn moderator/admin powers just cause you didn't like someone's signature? At least my signature wasn't annoying spam like that iamzack's posts and threads were. So at the first mention of my signature you edit it, while you let her spam everywhere just cause she was a woman? My signature was meant to show the most recent important events of the mods I am involved in.

Well, whatever, guess it's your kind of fun, huh? Thanks for acting like assholes.

1) Iamzack is monkeyed. So that argument is completely threadbare.
2) You added a flag to your signature on a thread where someone asked if they could do so and was told no. You then added one anyway. Consider yourself lucky not to have gotten an insulting title instead.
3) You aren't the only person in the world. Your use of the glow tag does irritate other forum members, especially those on Firefox, it was a complete abuse of the feature (and lets face it, most uses of the glow tag are an abuse of the feature!) and finally your sig WAS annoying spam. As I said in my first post it drew more attention than the content of your post and therefore was wrong.
4) We have turned off images in signatures with good reason. They are a feature that is frequently abused. We did not turn them off so people could then abuse coloured or glowing tags to do the same thing
5) No one forced you to remove your sig completely. You decided to do that.
6) You should have been well aware of all of this. You decided to ignore it and abuse the glow tag anyway. So yes I changed the way the tag works to make you and anyone else using that ridiculous thing look like a fool. But all I did was put up a sign pointing at you, you'd already dressed yourself up in a clown costume already.

Right. Why were there glow tags there then in the first place, huh? You could have had them removed by default, not working in sigs.

They're on by default in SMF. That's another reason I changed them to something insulting. People need to remember not to use them. Or this will all come back again next time we upgrade.

[Shade]

And, this is the first time I see someone complaining about glow tags

First time? Quote from me, earlier in this thread:

as glowy text makes the listing of the entire purpose for being you unreadable (and very annoying) to everyone who uses Firefox. Which I suspect is a fairly large percentage of this forum's regulars.

[Jeff Vader]

As Shade says, signatures are your 'advert' for yourself to everyone on the forum, if you want an example of how bad things can get, try looking through things like the X3 Forums. As much as I love the modding work done on that game, the forum drives me mad with one line of post, an Avatar, A siggy, with pictures etc, sometimes you have to spend a good few seconds just trying to find the actual content of the post, and worse still, the thread keeps leaping around as it reformats itself around each new siggy picture loaded etc.

There was this weird German Naruto forum that was also excellent in terms of signatures. Hosi123 ftw.

[Mobius]

I have been using Firefox for a while but I don't complain about the glows, at least not in a "Change that NOW!" way. By the way, I've just edited my Birthday PM example to fit the requirements people talked about in this thread.

[karajorma]

I have been using Firefox for a while but I don't complain about the glows, at least not in a "Change that NOW!" way.

And?

You were the person asking for flags in sigs in the first place, remember?

[Mobius]

I'm simply trying to dissipate the feelings of anger spreading here...nevermind.

[Droid803]

Honestly, I don't see what's so bad about the glow tag.
Its just like the text is highlighted...

[Snail]

Honestly, I don't see what's so bad about the glow tag.
Its just like the text is highlighted...

Yeah I agree.

That said, highlighting CAN be annoying in cases where the highlight is the same color as the text.

[Droid803]

That said, highlighting CAN be annoying in cases where the highlight is the same color as the text.

True, that.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

Great now look at the TBP DVD release thread.   

[Shade]

First time I'm actually able to read the coloured text there... which should in an of itself prove the idiocy of glowing text. Instead of highlighting the text, it made it unreadable.

[Jeff Vader]

  Good ****.

[Angelus]

Great now look at the TBP DVD release thread.   

Yeah, someone should edit that.

For Firefox users it's painful to look at glowy text.

I always wondered why people around here have colored bars/ beams in their signatures, i thought it's somehow FS2 related 'till i accidently marked an entire post with sig, as i tried to copy paste a term that i haven't heard before and saw there is something written.

While it can look good in IE, it's ugly/ unreadable in Firefox.
I personally don't care what people do in their Signatures, but if you want to "pimp" your mod/ campaign or have something to say in/ with your Sig, it would be better to make it readable by everyone, not only by the minority that uses IE.