My signature image has gone AWOL. I assume that something or someone has removed it - I definitely didn't do it myself.In the past I've had the wrath of Avsim on my head for violating signature image size (a 24-hour posting ban - in all fairness I got a warning first, but my attempt at correcting matters evidently wasn't sufficient), so this time I tried reading the rules very carefully. This is the offending image:This is a subset of the FAQ about signature images:# Images that clearly show the user to be a fan or supporter of a particular entity are allowed, but shall be in good taste and meet our size restrictions# An image included in the signature shall strictly adhere to our rules for those signature images; the image shall be no larger than 400 pixels wide X 68 pixels high in size. That image shall not be larger than 20Kbytes in weight.# Other image formats are allowed, as long as they do NOT exceed the 27,200 pixels maximum (400x68=27,200) and the 20Kbytes weight.Image size is 330*83 pixels, violating the second rule, but complying with the third.Maybe I'm dim, but I'd really appreciate if someone could clarify why my signature image was removed?

None of my business really but why would you be allowed to break one rule just because you comply with the two out of three? :(

None of my business really but why would you be allowed to break one rule just because you comply with the two out of three? :(

Read the two last rules again. The third is an exception to the second.

Read the two last rules again. The third is an exception to the second.

Your image is 330x83 = 27,390 pixels. The limit is 27,200 pixels, so your image is 190 pixels over the limit. What am I missing?

Your image is 330x83 = 27,390 pixels. The limit is 27,200 pixels, so your image is 190 pixels over the limit. What am I missing?

That's probably it, then. Thanks for pointing it out - and if that was what you meant to say in the other post, I didn't get it.

That's probably it, then. Thanks for pointing it out - and if that was what you meant to say in the other post, I didn't get it.

Yes indeed, SIGs need to be no larger than 400 wide X 68 tall and no more than 20K file sizeMembers get three official warnings, the second one gives you the 2 day suspensionYou already had two warnings on it, it is time to hit the third warning, we tried to help you comply with the rules ......the third will get you banned by the system.So now you know and have the same size SIG still showing, you should trim the bottom so it is no more than 68 tall before you get the final Avsim warning, if you can't fix it right away, remove it until you can.

Yes indeed, SIGs need to be no larger than 400 wide X 68 tall and no more than 20K file sizeMembers get three official warnings, the second one gives you the 2 day suspensionYou already had two warnings on it, it is time to hit the third warning, we tried to help you comply with the rules ......the third will get you banned by the system.So now you know and have the same size SIG still showing, you should trim the bottom so it is no more than 68 tall before you get the final Avsim warning, if you can't fix it right away, remove it until you can.

Then I STILL don't get it... Can you help me understand this line from the FAQ:"Other image formats are allowed, as long as they do NOT exceed the 27,200 pixels maximum (400x68=27,200) and the 20Kbytes weight."And no, I do not still have the same sig showing - I put it back in after doublechecking that the 27,200 pixel maximum was not exceeded. (And the first two warnings were a while ago, different signature).

Then I STILL don't get it... Can you help me understand this line from the FAQ:"Other image formats are allowed, as long as they do NOT exceed the 27,200 pixels maximum (400x68=27,200) and the 20Kbytes weight."And no, I do not still have the same sig showing - I put it back in after doublechecking that the 27,200 pixel maximum was not exceeded. (And the first two warnings were a while ago, different signature).

Simply make your SIG no larger than 400 x 68 you are good on the file size Trim a bit from the bottom and you are good to go...

Simply make your SIG no larger than 400 x 68 you are good on the file size Trim a bit from the bottom and you are good to go...

You are implementing the rules different from what you state in your own FAQ.

here's a relatively safe one, on photoshop it shows up as 16k on my comp, but when hosted it bloats to 20.9k (staggerwing if you have a problem with that .9k, just say so).

Thanks, Peter - should be OK, now, shows as just shy of 18K on my server.

here's a relatively safe one, on photoshop it shows up as 16k on my comp, but when hosted it bloats to 20.9k (staggerwing if you have a problem with that .9k, just say so).

We simply check these by right clicking on the image to see "Properties" this one shows 330 x 65 @ 17,156 and of course that is just fine.There are some image storage sites that do increase the size of an image for some reason, but it only takes a quick double check after you use it at Avsim to know it's okay.Re: Other image formats are allowed, as long as they do NOT exceed the 27,200 pixels maximum (400x68=27,200) and the 20Kbytes weightI WILL try to find out from the author of these rules if that is indeed what he wanted to state in this latest FAQ on SIG size, I do believe that "Formats" used to refer to file extensions not graphic dimensions showing in a post.

That's probably it, then. Thanks for pointing it out - and if that was what you meant to say in the other post, I didn't get it.

Yes that's what I meant.That being said though, looking at the rule it got me thinking.. even if you do the multiplication and end up below 27,200 pixels, would it make sense if someone had a 20x1360 signature "tower" which take a whole lotta space vertically? :( So maybe it would be better to stick to a strict height x width limit.

That being said though, looking at the rule it got me thinking.. even if you do the multiplication and end up below 27,200 pixels, would it make sense if someone had a 20x1360 signature "tower" which take a whole lotta space vertically? :( So maybe it would be better to stick to a strict height x width limit.

Obviously not reasonable, but then my signature wasn't anything like that.There is nothing in the faq about file formats (other than saying images are allowed).Anyway, it wasn't a big deal, at least not until the threat of a permanent ban came up - I was just trying to understand what had happened.Edit: By the way, there is nothing in the FAQ about a ban on third violation, either - just that repeated warnings will "result in removal of signature permanently". Which is exactly what happened in my case, I suppose

Obviously not reasonable, but then my signature wasn't anything like that.There is nothing in the faq about file formats (other than saying images are allowed).Anyway, it wasn't a big deal, at least not until the threat of a permanent ban came up - I was just trying to understand what had happened.Edit: By the way, there is nothing in the FAQ about a ban on third violation, either - just that repeated warnings will "result in removal of signature permanently". Which is exactly what happened in my case, I suppose

Hold on here....I'm not sure why you want to keep going with this but seems you do..There was no "Threat" of a banning in this thread, members are sent a automated Email when the warning button is clicked here on whatever subject is at hand... the first one tells the member that he has broken the rules and please don't do it again as the NEXT time they will get a 2 day suspension.If the member still does not comply with the requests, the THIRD warning does an automatic ban of that member. that is clearly stated in the 2nd warning for you to read.Records show your first warning was issued back on July 19th, seems you changed your SIG, but went with another that didn't fit either, the latest warning in your Email was July 21st .......that was #2The removal of your SIG was done rather than doing the third warning with ban.I decided to use my time to work with you on this rather than just do the easy thing and hit the third warning, and here I am STILL using time up on this because you want to be right and not do what makes the forums work smoothly for everyone.Your reply said nothing about my EDIT to state that I was checking on this change in the rules to see if that is what was intended to be printed or not. now and then a cut and paste can go wrong and not be caught by the author, so please know that I have submitted your/our, question/complaint to Tom Allensworth and when I get an answer, either myself or Tom Allensworth will reply...EDIT; to get the dates right according to the records...