Sig pic doesnt show. What do I do?

Hey guys. I have made a sig pic less than 500X100 and less than 100kb. Have uploaded it, in the "edit signature".

Its now listed as my signature picture but doesnt show, neither on preview or my posts. What do I do next?

Click on the edit signature in user CP, upload your signature and click on the link that says "insert signature picture".

there is no such "insert signature picture" link :huh:

Hey guys. I have made a sig pic less than 500X100 and less than 100kb

Forum rules:

2.1. - Signatures may include images and/or text. If using images, use the Control Panel to upload the image to the forum for hosting and make sure it does not exceed the stated limitations of 500x100x20KB.

It's 500 pixels by 100 pixels and size less than 20KB, not 100KB.

checked everybodies sig, and they all are bigger than 20kb... :huh:

Hm. Interesting. :P

Forum rules:

2.1. - Signatures may include images and/or text. If using images, use the Control Panel to upload the image to the forum for hosting and make sure it does not exceed the stated limitations of 500x100x20KB.

 

It's 500 pixels by 100 pixels and size less than 20KB, not 100KB.

Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 500 by 100 pixels or 100.0 KB (whichever is smaller).

It's 100kb not 20 kb ;)

well, I dont see that link on my signature window. But your SIGPIC BBcode seemed to have done it for me thx!

What is the point with your banner Pilotasso? Is that Yugoslavian MiG-29 burning?

you would rather it be bosnian?

What is the point with your banner Pilotasso? Is that Yugoslavian MiG-29 burning?

I guess this is just the mid-air crash on a airshow where those mig's are got destroyed. It is not a Yugoslavian mig I believe...

Pilotasso,

I've never seen Rytheon advertising itself as a "MiG parts distributor". This statement is very provocative and distasteful.

Your banner shows flying AMRAAM and burning MiG-29 which clearly invokes memories of the 1999 NATO use of military over Yugoslavia. Your banner goes beyond the purpose of this forum and has very strong political connotation.

There was a TV show after that accident "seismic seconds". The pilots laughed about it saying it was so spectacular they wanted to do it again, they could always make more planes.

 

Besides my sig is only about aerospace manufacturers. Nothing more ;)

 

EDIT: heres the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjyvs04kKD4&feature=related

Get it over with haj, havent you realized that when you start puting out those gloom and doom coments few care what you have to say.

I got better things to do than think yugoslavia all day, you and your inpertinent coments even less.

 

Hint, I was sure not to be thinking about you when I made the banner. Feel better now?

no deaths , no injuries it doesn't shock me

Sometimes I wish I could just let things go...........

.....Your banner shows flying AMRAAM and burning MiG-29 which clearly invokes memories of the 1999 NATO use of military over Yugoslavia......

And Memories of the Ethiopian/Eritrean Conflict 1998-2000? Thought Not......

It is your Statement as above that Stands as Provocative and Argumentative ;)

This is military and aviation news thread guys. :pilotfly:

What is the point with your banner Pilotasso? Is that Yugoslavian MiG-29 burning?

No it's Fairford accident!

ohh, it's been already answered!

I guess this is just the mid-air crash on a airshow where those mig's are got destroyed. It is not a Yugoslavian mig I believe...

Pilotasso,

 

I've never seen Rytheon advertising itself as a "MiG parts distributor". This statement is very provocative and distasteful.

Actually, they even had a mouse pad that said that:

AIM-9 Sidewinder, the greatest distributor of MiG Parts world-wide, which was later changed to 'Raytheon', IIRC, but perhaps I don't remember too well.

Your banner shows flying AMRAAM and burning MiG-29 which clearly invokes memories of the 1999 NATO use of military over Yugoslavia. Your banner goes beyond the purpose of this forum and has very strong political connotation.

Okay, why don't you start complaining to people who have flaming F-15's in their sigs too, now then? I hate to rememer there two training incidents where F-15's were hit by sidewinders ....

i have kleenex for those in need.

GGT and Haj, did you ever meet in HL?!

Well, you should!

So you can whip eachother with 'winders, AMRAAMs, R-77s and R-73...

And just to make sure everybody knows this...remember...

my dad is strongest man alive!

Even stronger than Tyson? O.o

GGT and Haj, did you ever meet in HL?!

 

Well, you should!

 

So you can whip eachother with 'winders, AMRAAMs, R-77s and R-73...

 

And just to make sure everybody knows this...remember...

 

my dad is strongest man alive!

I must say that I am appalled that these kind of banners are allowed on this forum. What do we do next? Get pictures of remains of F-16's, F-4's, B-52's ... blown by missiles and put those pictures in our banners with some "funny" comments next to them? it is just plain wrong. Period.

personally i think people wining about stupid crap should be banned. .

Hajduk, a question:

The games we're playing have a recurring theme where the whole object of the game is to kill georgian, americans, brits, germans, ukrainians, insurgents, russians... all types of nationalities and people. It is those games that have brought us all to this forum. (Okey, the object is to play at airborne warfare, but the effect is that we are simulating those acts.)

If it is acceptable to do something like that for entertainment for hours on end then why would a small witticism on a signature picture be so horrible? I would personally say that I find it a lot more offensive that I greatly enjoy a game called Defcon - the object of which is to conduct a global nuclear war. If anything should be offensive it's the enjoyment of playing pretend nuke slugfest. ;)

If the re-enactment of the act of killing (in a military setting, there's different types of killing of course) is an acceptable form of entertainment to you - which it obviously is - then I don't understand what you are complaining about. Like Viper highlighted: what about the Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict? What about Gulf Wars 1, 2 and 3? Surely this would apply to those too?