Images in signatures

[nick]

Is there a good reason why the [img] tag is not directly supported in signatures? I can understand that huge images linked in this way would be a big disadvantage but was just wondering what the thinking was. In an ideal world I would like to link to an image which I believe would not in anyway be against site rules but which for technical and practical reasons cant be uploaded onto vt.

[CaptainObvious]

Would the technical/practical reasons be image filesize?

[nick]

Would the technical/practical reasons be image filesize?
Well yes, I referred to that in my question, I can see that it could affect page loading times etc if there were big images, just seems a shame there's no way to restrict the image size without barring offsite links.

[nick]

Any official answer on this one?

[Maverick]

Any official answer on this one?
Images have to be uploaded because there were complaints about the size of images in peoples signatures. There is no feasible way to control the size of images in signatures without them being uploaded to VT first.

[nick]

Images have to be uploaded because there were complaints about the size of images in peoples signatures. There is no feasible way to control the size of images in signatures without them being uploaded to VT first.
Thanks for the reply Ant, I kind of guesed it was all about size (appropriate for VT?)

Its a shame really, sort of suppression of the masses for the abuses of a few.

It seems kind of crazy that vb allows you to limit the size of avatars but not the size of images in sigs, but hey, thats just how it is.

[Maverick]

The current method limits the size the same way avatars are resized. I don't see how its a suppression because the masses wanted limitations to the size of signature pictures. The only way that is possible is for them to be uploaded to VT. Everyone is still allowed 1 picture.

Referring thread http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=60540&highlight=signatures

[nick]

Well dont get me wrong, I completely understand and agree with the need for a size limitation. Its just that the current system only really allows for a static image (although obviously you can keep manually changing it) whereas for some purposes a link to an automatically changing offsite image would be completely within the rules and more convenient.