Your sig is ugly. Ill be happy to help you out with a new one :-D
Dude, so is yours!
I'm going to have to agree with iago with that :/ I have 2 background pictures that I can slap names on. I have never used them before ;].
Admit it though, mine pwns you all!
Lolol iago said dude.
Lolol. ROFLHACK. -_-
All image-based signatures suck. ALL OF THEM.
Quote from: Newby on March 15, 2005, 07:57:28 PM
All image-based signatures suck. ALL OF THEM.
Does mine count as "image-based"? Mine has a small image, but it's not based on it.
I think having a very small or no image is the best. I've adblocked everybody signatures anyway, to save me a headache :)
Roffles. I made the backround. I didnt dl it..... + I think im going to go backt o my oldo ne.
/me has sexy avatars and sigs disabled.
THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME, LEACHERS.
wtfx
mine doesn't
Edit:
:| Mine's not even on here. lol
Pwned. You know you <3 mine though. I need to work on one with brushes.
I thought I replyed here already. Meh. I changed my sig to a new 31 second GIMP job from the old 30 second one.
Also, if anyone wants a nice Slackware sig, its up for grabs.
(http://joe.astriks.com/images/slacksig.png)
Quote from: Joey on March 27, 2005, 04:20:44 AM
I thought I replyed here already. Meh. I changed my sig to a new 31 second GIMP job from the old 30 second one.
Also, if anyone wants a nice Slackware sig, its up for grabs.
(http://joe.astriks.com/images/slacksig.png)
Too big. Mine is better :P
I disabled images in signatures..
They're (generally) lame and annoying.
I usually block them unless they're small and tasteful :)
Quote from: iago on April 15, 2005, 02:55:59 PM
I usually block them unless they're small and tasteful :)
Impossible!
Quote from: krazed on April 15, 2005, 03:36:43 PM
Quote from: iago on April 15, 2005, 02:55:59 PM
I usually block them unless they're small and tasteful :)
Impossible!
As far as I'm concerned, the one in my signature is. It's only about 30x90 or so :)
<edit> wow, 31x88.. so close :)