Suggestions, New ideas, Questions, and Feedback for the WOF

Yeah I wouldn't mind seeing some new people here from time to time.

I tried wooing a few back but I don't think it worked very well.

Are you using Chrome? I think Cher had a similar issue when using Chrome. She said images became even smaller when she maximized the browser, but it should actually enlarge the images. But I don't know, I tested it out on a few browsers and they all looked fine to me, so I can't be 100% sure if it's browser related or not.

Other than that, some of the images can be clicked on to view them larger (such as the selfies or attachments in general), or for the ones you cannot click on, you can right click and select "view image", and it should be bigger unless the photo was already at max size on the forum. However, some of the images posted are naturally smaller than even I have control over. A lot of the very small images were not reduced by the forum; some images were never full-sized to begin with.

The main reasoning behind the size restriction is that the images take up the entire post and alter the thread's size making it look less uniform and making it take more time to scroll through the page. Same for people adding images into their signature... it was messy and aesthetically unappealing.

More importantly, it can make pages take a longer time to load if the images are at their max size. Larger images = slower loading time and poorer performance.

We have linked and attached images being used, but it depends on the poster. The attachments are not available if you use Quick Reply, you would have to click on "Reply" to access the other functions.

For attachments in particular, the forum uses thumbnail images, which can be up to 90% smaller in file size, and this significantly reduces bandwidth usage and improves the speed of page loads.

There isn't any extra processing when displaying linked images at a smaller size: the image is downloaded and rendered only once when the page is loaded. There is no "re-sizing" per se; the linked images are displayed in the predetermined size defined in the code from the server. In our case, we replaced full-size display with the more aesthetic reduced-size display to keep things uniform, so technically no steps are added and there are no cumulative negative effects.

If you're using a standard monitor, then the images should display at a viewable size unless your browser window is small. You would have to maximize the browser window to display the image at the largest reduced size, and it should be more of a medium-sized image. If you are on a phone, netbook, tablet, etc., then you will likely see small images regardless because the plugin displays them at a percentage of the resolution. Besides that, I'm not sure why people are having different experiences other than different browsers or even browser versions.

Weird, I can't see images if I click on the quote button lol why is everything so different!?!

Personally, I feel the same impact regardless of the image size; I find all of your images beautiful. The thing is, the images do not look tiny to me at all, so it is harder for me to gauge the differences we are seeing. I do not have to click on most of the images because I see them perfectly fine; they look about half the size of the original size at most, which is about a medium-sized image.

When the image reduction is working as intended, it really should not hinder your ability to see the images or read anything. Some are seeing things differently on here, that's for sure, and unfortunately, I cannot do much about that. If more people are also having issues with seeing images on here, though, then of course I can make them slightly larger, but it still may not be large enough for some to view them without clicking.

I would not think it's very hard to click on an image, especially if you have interest in viewing it. Hopefully it's not an arduous task for everyone here to do so =p Again, it's not for a purely aesthetic reason: reduced images costs less bandwidth and results in a faster load time.

With the way I have it now everyone can be "happy". Nobody would be subjected to giant images that take up an entire window (that they may not even want to see), whereas those who do want to see them larger can at least click on them to do so. With the way it was, there was no option for anyone to make the images smaller if they were an eye-sore or took up too much space. They were just there, always giant and in your face. That would ruin anyone's experience, especially when you are trying to chat, and you have all these images you need to scroll through to see what is being said.

I do want the forum to be neat, clean, and appealing for everyone, and it truly loses that feel when the images are max size at all time, especially with people being able to add images into the signature. The images were just way too big, and it needed to be done. The whole thread would become stretched to the size of the largest image, so each post ends up being an enlarged box that looks out of place and empty, but also adds more scrolling.

I am sorry it takes away from your experience here. I also enjoy sharing images and looking at images. We have to keep in mind, though, this isn't a picture forum; the forum was intended for chatting and discussions, and pictures are just a nice perk. Unfortunately, the large images take away from the forum more than they add.

Are our Messages Private?

If not, who is allowed to snoop?

I would like to know.

I personally like a rather untidy forum.

One where people can cruise and scroll, pick and choose, WO worrying about
silly little protocols, and where something belongs.
f**k that!

I think that might also interfere with creative spontaneity which adds to the
ebb and flow of the posts.
I sometimes just write at Mach speed bc my writing spirit is pushing me at that time,
and I do NOT want to go searching for the RIGHT CATEGORY.

Also, more than a few may actually resent the hand slapping as a type of rejection,
intended or not.

Why would admin piss away protocol time when they could be doing more meaningful stuff
that encourages instead of discouraging.

We are a great group here, and too many people just come and go.

Something is just not right.

Yikes!

Hissy.

I have the most shocking memory, if stuff was not findable, I would be utterly lost.

However, I think it could work as an alternative style of thread. Stick it into general discussion in a single thread called, perhaps "What's on your mind?"

It would have no rules other than the obvious ones of decency and courtesy, and you could join in with the topic, divert it, ignore it, or flip it over and say whatever you like, about whatever you like with no reference to any previous post.

It could be fun, and at least we would know where it was and what to expect.

Moderation would only be done over the obvious like decency, or courtesy.

I have thought the same, Cherry. A completely random thread. And then we can add random things from other threads in there, too lol if it's not something we can discuss in great length, of course... or if it doesn't fit anywhere else anyway.

I did have a good laugh when I spotted that M's thread regarding NOT modding threads was moved. LOL

Classic.

Perhaps the all-encompassing thread should be named M-Talk.

I don't do the polls as I expect the poll owner to show their opinion first.

It is nothing to do with the type of poll.