Signature size rule being relaxed?

[#1]

A screenshot with the text would probably exceed the 40K limit.
As above - unless he's digging his heels in and deliberately wants one >30k high quality and one <6k low quality image in his signature to make his point, the images are available in good quality at low file size on the previous page.

[#2]

Not digging heals at all
If you are referring to

Quote from: DomS

For reference, resizing them to 100 pixels high rather than using the code resize brings their size down to around 10k each as a .jpg

Where was is mentioned that they are available ?
I used the software on my laptop which gave a different results to yours & reported my findings
I also said

Quote from: TORPC

Cheers jelv <snip> Looks like I may either have to change file format & or open P/S & choose the suitable for web option & see if it will lower the kb If not Have anyone any alternate ideas how to reduce the kb to keep inline with forum rules ?

Is that any reason I am,  as you said

Quote

Digging heals

?
Btw
What software / O/S did you use in resizing the images

[#3]

Quote

Signatures should use no more space than 5 lines of standard sized text would, this includes any blank lines and images you choose to use. Image based signatures should be limited to 100 x 560 pixels and a maximum total file size of 40kB.

Quote from: TORPC

Also I do not see what the fuss is as there was no mention of the text in the original statement as it only referred to the height of the images

As an "amused observer" I would say that this is pedantry in the extreme, it's obvious what the intent of this rule is overall and that your signature contravenes it.
You're not a tax lawyer as well in your day job are you?  
If I were you I'd recommend a "gracious retreat", starting by changing your signature so that there is no possibility of dispute. How hard can that be?  
Or do you subscribe to Winston Churchill's position:

Quote

we shall never surrender

 
We'll be descending into Godwin's law if we're not careful, and equating the Moderators with Hitler.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[#4]

Sorry but this seems like a overreaction to being asked to follow the same rules as everyone else. The moderators try to enforce the rules that are there, can we support them on this? If you don't agree with a rule maybe try suggesting an improvement but in a constructive way.
This rule is there for a couple of reasons, notably that we don't want signatures taking over the forum and being more prominent than the actual posts and also having less images in signatures reduces the loading time for those on a slower connection.
It may be time to review the signature size and maybe change it so the default size that speedtest.net etc produce is allowed, that's something I'll start talking to the moderators about.
I'll reply to your PM later today TORPC.

[#5]

Could someone explain what benefit showing one off speed test results in signatures has?
Without knowing what technology is being used (20CN, 21CN, FTTC or FTTP) and distance from exchange or cabinet it is meaningless. What is appropriate is a live thinkbroadband quality meter (ping) because it is live.
There was a long discussion about the same issue on the tbb forums: http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/newsite/t/4301792-signature-display-request.html As far as I can tell the main difference is that having many people with speed tests results in more people turning off signature display.

[#6]

@HPSauce
I have amended the signature
& when it was 1^st mentioned in an open thread & as I so rightly quoted there was no mention of removing the text from underneath the images
@Chris
It is not an over reaction to follow suit at all
However it is to highlight the crux of the matter is
That
A Moderator is & has been contradictory to the case
He signed off on my signature as being ok on January 08/2014
& now
Says the complete opposite
is there 1 law / rule for Mods & separate for members ?
Since the Moderator  made a mistake & won't admit it, then what are members to do ?
Therefore Moderators are allowed to get away with making mistakes & cause disruption to members, are they ?
Thank you for looking into reviewing the signature size change, as mine is not the only 1 I can assure you & unlike some I will not grass others up by naming & shaming them, for the sake of it.
I will let the forum police do their job & speak to all offenders in public like they have done to me
I await your response to my PM later
Then I will know which fork in the road I will have to take

[#7]

I can remember seeing your signature with the 3db margin below. I can also remember seeing it with the 3db margin to the right and no other text (i.e. before you added the "How can we help...") - I strongly suspect that was the version that Jim approved as it would make no sense whatsoever for him to ask you to move the 3db and then overlook the later addition.
I have reported your signature to the moderators at least once as, right or wrong, if the rules are there I think they should be obeyed. I suspect that your being contacted by the moderators was probably as a result of my report.

[#8]

Quote from: TORPC

What software / O/S did you use in resizing the images

I uploaded them as files on the previous page for you to have a look at / download / host etc.
I used an old copy of Corel Photo Paint 12 to open them, went to tool and resize (resized to 100 pixels high and kept aspect ratio) then saved them as a .jpg file.
The copy of Windows Paint I have that came with Win 8 also has the facility to resize by pixel height and export to .jpg
Hope that helps 

[#9]

I find IrfanView as good as anything.

[#10]

I use FastStone Image Viewer which also does screen caps and can remove the metadata from pictures which can reduce the file size quite a bit on thumbnails

[#11]

I can't believe there are so many threads on this 1 topic! 
So much for forum rules. 

[#12]

Quote from: jelv

Is this rule being relaxed? I've seen and reported signatures where there is a 100 pixel deep image AND text underneath and they haven't been changed. 100 pixels is nearer 6 lines of text at standard font size so adding a text line under the images is definitely outside of this rule.

That all depends on the user to be honest. Lets face it, most browsers can zoom in / out and enlarge the page.
If I zoom in on my browser, yours looks huge too:

How do we know that some of you people aren't zoomed in (and forgetting it) when complaining about signature sizes? - we don't.
It's all about perception at the users end. I have no issue with the sig sizes really.

[#13]

Not really
Even when zoomed in the reported size doesn't change