Maybe if

[Deleted member 66627]

The avatar selection is turned on and the sizes for the avatars are modest and not thumbnail sized.. it will cut down on huge signatures? Because it will be giving a chance to have one main image as an avatar?

 

[His Divine Shadow]

Technically feasable, to be sure, but Myriads has pointed out several times before that the TMF decided signatures were its method of user expression and not avatars (one instance is here). He's the final word but it's likely to be the same as that.

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Alrighty then. Thanks, DSL.

 

[Myriads]

You can all have avitars and no signatures at all.

or

All have signatures and no avitars at all.

I felt that more people like the flexability of a sig, rather then the single small box of an avatar. So I chose sigs.

The place is cluttered as it is without adding yet another possible blinking scrolling flashing box to each post. I'm not allowing both.

Myriads

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Pfteh. ><

 

[venray]

Signatures is my vote as always..we do not need both...less room for self expression with avatars...

 

[heyoka]

I agree with having sigs. While I like avatars as a cool little add-on, they don't give us nearly the amount of ability to express ourselves. Imagine if we all had these dinky little avatars and no siggy. We wouldn't be treated to people's pics of themselves, banners for web site promotion, cute little poems and the like. While there are some sigs that I don't care for, I'd prefer to tollerate them rather than do away with the whole thing in favor of avatars. Cool idea, Jo. But, I gotta go with Myr on this one.