Stradawhovious, there is no watermark that can really protect your photos Anyone with some editing skill can remove any watermark and if not, there are TONS of tuts on "how to remove watermark". Watermark is good only for letting people know, who took the photo. Or are you satisfied if you can repel computer noobs from stealing your images? Anyone who wants to steal your photo will do so and putting obtrusive watermarks won't help you nor your visitors.
OP, this watermark is small and not really that disturbing, so it's fine.
Just one note: it isn't the best idea to change watermarks very often, just because you got bored. Watermark is your signature, and if you change it too often, people will get confused and it certainly won't help your name.
On a more serious note, if I ever did decide to go with a watermark, it would be purely for advertising purposes. With facebook and other social media, I know of several photographers in my area only because I see their watermark on facebook pictures. For me it has nothing to do with preventing the client from printing pictures for free.
ok so the whole point of this watermark is to use it as a signature. I am well aware that they can be easily removed. I think its a good advertising technique for online networking that is all. I wanted feedback on how it looks. So far I have only one comment on how it looks so thanks goes out to Schwettylens. It actually is my multiplayer gaming clan logo! Haha just kidding. I dont have time nor the interest in gaming. On another note it would be nice to get some more opinions on how it looks thank you.