FAO moderators

[Mad Cyril]

Can you ban teenage fantasists from putting large pictures of Russian tennis starlets into their signatures?

1. I doubt she is interested in spotty Essex adolescents.

2. It significantly increases the risk of those of us who work for a living being 'busted' for looking at shrimperzone.

Cheers.

 

[Javea Shrimper]

Agreed.

I think they will need to be removed ... I know when I was back in the UK, my company's net nanny was always picking up these image files as illicit material ...

WS

 

[BluePartridge]

I concur your excellency!

 

[The General]

Rubbish idea.

Not happening.

Kev

 

[Javea Shrimper]

If the moderators say it's going to happen, it will, young man ...

WS

 

[The General]

Very sneaky question, Mike. Had to read it twice to make sure i understood ...

Kev

 

[Javea Shrimper]

I know!

However you could make your image smaller though, Kev. I think this is the issue. Maybe we ought to impose a limit on the size of images in the signature, just to make sure, rather than ban them all together. She may be an above average looking Ruskie but they doesn't mean everyone wants to have her imposed onto their PC screen ...

WS

 

[overseas shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Javea Shrimper @ July 10 2004,16:37)]I know!

However you could make your image smaller though, Kev. I think this is the issue. Maybe we ought to impose a limit on the size of images in the signature, just to make sure, rather than ban them all together. She may be an above average looking Ruskie but they doesn't mean everyone wants to have her imposed onto their PC screen ...

WS

I'd like her imposed on my bed!

But on a serious note, if these images can get people in to trouble, it's pretty self-centred to show a disregard for these individuals.

 

[Javea Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (overseas shrimper @ July 10 2004,16:11)]But on a serious note, if these images can get people in to trouble, it's pretty self-centred to show a disregard for these individuals.

Hey, but that's our Kev!

WS

 

[The General]

How about a bigger avatar width (or is that not possible!?) ...

Kev

 

[Javea Shrimper]

Not really.

Anyway, this is a message-board, not a gallery ...

WS

 

[footymad13]

Quote[/b] (overseas shrimper @ July 10 2004,16:11)]

Quote[/b] (Javea Shrimper @ July 10 2004,16:37)]I know!

However you could make your image smaller though, Kev. I think this is the issue. Maybe we ought to impose a limit on the size of images in the signature, just to make sure, rather than ban them all together. She may be an above average looking Ruskie but they doesn't mean everyone wants to have her imposed onto their PC screen ...

WS

I'd like her imposed on my bed!

But on a serious note, if these images can get people in to trouble, it's pretty self-centred to show a disregard for these individuals.

I can understand people wishing to have some girl on there avatar (long as its Kiera Knightly

) however people esp Kev knows that alot of people work in offices where they have filters that don't allow them sort of pictures so why not put them in the lil box allocated.

Or do these people crave attention ?

 

[The General]

You've answered your own question there. Me me me me me (you get it ...)

Kev

 

[footymad13]

Quote[/b] (The General @ July 10 2004,18:55)]You've answered your own question there. Me me me me me (you get it ...)

Kev

Your soooooo clever !

 

[BluePartridge]

Quote[/b] (The General @ July 10 2004,18:55)]You've answered your own question there. Me me me me me (you get it ...)

Kev

There's a pork related joke in everything this being no exception.

 

[southend_utd_fan]

Leave my Cat alone!

 

[The Artful Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (footymad13 @ July 10 2004,18:48)]however people esp Kev knows that alot of people work in offices where they have filters that don't allow them sort of pictures so why not put them in the lil box allocated.

Or do these people crave attention ?

....technically speaking if you looked at your works internet policy you will probably find that the vast majority of employers tell their employees that they are not to use the internet, other than, for work purposes. There is of course leniancy in this, BUT most places are very strict on the use of message boards/ chat rooms.
Any SZ user at work could probably lose their job for using SZ if a Jobsworth decided to implement those rules and most of us would have very little argument to fight back.
The odd dodgy photo on a signituare doesnt bother me. but they are getting bigger and attracting apprentices with big mouths. A bit of discretion would be nice? a tasteful shot perhaps? Just a bit of common sense is all most of us are asking for? otherwise we'll be getting camel toe shots of Sharapova and downblouses of Abi Titmuss and we'll all get banned and sacked and .....etc

 

[Javea Shrimper]

Yes, perhaps rather than ban them altogether, we should think about limiting their size. Kev's 328 x 200 pixels is obviously far too big so maybe we should limit images to something around half that size ...

WS

 

[TerryintheWest]

Why not limit pictures to the avatar? If the group member wants to turn the avatars off on his pc he/she can do so.:;):

 

[Javea Shrimper]

Good idea, Terry ...

WS