We want Forum Feedback!

[whitebaron]

ONE of the problems with THIS forum is the number of images allowed and posted in threads and especially in sigs. I am on two others with invision, and neither has the problems we sometimes get here.

I tend to disagree. Yes, some people have overly large signatures or use to many large images, but that does not hurt the server, only the users are slowed down (in my case: a tiny little bit).

 

The real problems are that ipb search sucks, its bb parser is not really state of the art and background maintenance is barely existant.

 

My main concern about images is trading. When images are limited, you can not do what many people do now: be very graphic in your wants and haves. But this could be very easily resolved by adding all eggs as smilies or custom bb tag.

 

:whiptail: or [egg]whiptail[/egg] would both work nicely.

Edited August 22, 2013 by whitebaron

[Fuzzbucket]

Can you clarify what you mean by "the problems we sometimes get here?"

 

Is your suggestion to disallow moving images in signatures and avatars?

 

Because in many cases, that's reasonable. I've seen people with 11MB of GIFs in their signature before (and asked them to remove/reduce that to a more manageable size).

What I mean (leaving aside the whole place falling over dead !) is indeed the time to takes to load pages - not only here, where I am on a shaky rocket hub, but even at my other home, where I have good high speed and no issues when I run a tracer. I well recall when I was on dial-up - I almost never came to the forum because I just couldn't get IN !

 

And yes - sigs ARE the big issue; I do think limiting the size of gifs allowed might help. One forum I'm on you can't upload anything larger than 370 kb for an image, even as an attachment. That seems to be enough - and it does have a LOT of art on display.

[Cinnamin Draconna]

I'm sometimes tempted to turn off sigs and avs because of animation. But only those big, annoying ones that take forever to load.. the animation loops can take up to a full minute making them like mini-movies. Small ones that just repeat themselves over and over or just wiggle a bit aren't a problem.. those are cute; like this one -

 

But the really bad ones are the multi-colored flashing ones that could cause an epileptic seizure. Those aren't just annoying, they're dangerous.

 

You don't need software to enforce sig sizes or file sizes; you just put the limits in the rules and if the rules are broken an admin or mod can just remove the offending av or sig. Send the offender a PM with an explanation and tell them to live by the rules or don't use a sig/av.

[whitebaron]

Also, you cant really use software to do this, either. Yes, it could in theory check the filesize of a linked image, but it would have to do so every time you load the forum because its linked off-site, and thus can change. that's so much impractical, that you could also just put a minute of wait before page loading, has the same effect...

[Fuzzbucket]

Also, you cant really use software to do this, either. Yes, it could in theory check the filesize of a linked image, but it would have to do so every time you load the forum because its linked off-site, and thus can change. that's so much impractical, that you could also just put a minute of wait before page loading, has the same effect...

All I know is that the forums I refer to DO manage to prevent larger images loading. And TJ's post suggests that he knows how to do that, so....

[whitebaron]

All I know is that the forums I refer to DO manage to prevent larger images loading. And TJ's post suggests that he knows how to do that, so....

TJ did in no way imply a pure technical solution there. There's only so much you can do when allowing images:

• Checking file types of images linked
• Checking size and filetype of images uploaded
• Restricting the viewport of signatures to a certain height
• Setting a maximum size for images displayed (only display-size, not the file-size), so they do not break the page

You could, in theory, build something to check hotlinked files.. But its not really feasible to do so. (i know of no forums software that has this built in, and I know many.)

[pinkgothic]

You could, in theory, build something to check hotlinked files.. But its not really feasible to do so. (i know of no forums software that has this built in, and I know many.)

 

phpBB does, actually - it requests the image URL and makes sure it doesn't exceed the maximum image dimensions. It only does it on posting (/ editing one's post), though, not on post-view, which of course means you can trick it by changing the hotlinked image later, though that could theoretically be circumvented by downloading it and just replacing the post's hotlink with a link to the local file.

 

(I say 'theoretically' because if that were how it worked you'd need to be very careful that the mechanism didn't allow someone to put arbitrarily large files or an arbitrarily large collection of files on your server.)

[Obscure_Trash]

But the really bad ones are the multi-colored flashing ones that could cause an epileptic seizure. Those aren't just annoying, they're dangerous.

 

You don't need software to enforce sig sizes or file sizes; you just put the limits in the rules and if the rules are broken an admin or mod can just remove the offending av or sig. Send the offender a PM with an explanation and tell them to live by the rules or don't use a sig/av.

If you see something physically harmful in a sig or post, please do report it. Rainbow text was banned in introductions for this reason. If something is too obnoxious to look at/hurts your eyes, just report one of their posts and let us know why. :3

 

~

 

I'm do like the character limit better than the file size limits some other forums have instead, but I'm not against switching/adding, as long as it's a reasonable restriction.

[Pokemonfan13]

I'm not really bothered by sigs and avs and stuff, although I do block anything I find obnoxious. But because I know some people have slow/limited internet I totally support a size limitation on posted images if it can be done, and at least a size limit for the whole sig.

[Deblob167]

How about the forums have like a Like, Dislike, and a Thank button to rate posts

[skauble]

How about the forums have like a Like, Dislike, and a Thank button to rate posts

I'm not necessarily opposed to "Like" and "Thank", but I don't think that "dislike" would serve a purpose that is greater than the potential it has for drama and misuse.

 

I can see where it could be used appropriately to disagree with a suggestion made in the Suggestion forum, but voting "no" in polls does the same thing. I'm leery of an automatic option being given for people to dislike things throughout a discussion. I think that it's good to allow people who just want to drop a general "yes" or "no" down to have the poll option, but if someone wants to participate in the actual discussion part then I think they should post as opposed to just getting to drive by "dislike" individual replies.

 

 

Which reminds me of a bit of feedback of my own (although I'm sure it's been mentioned before) - Since people aren't supposed to just post "+1/Don't support" replies in response to suggestions because they can just express that through poll votes, could we get a straight out "No" option edited in whenever it's missing?

 

It always seems to end with the poll being completely useless unless people are willing to put in a clear "Yes" and "No" option, and it's kind of unfair to tell people not to just add "yes" or "no" in replies because they need to use this other option if it keeps not getting added.

[Pokemonfan13]

The problem is if it is caught too late too many people have already either voted the closest they could or nulled, so adding in "no" doesn't help. The poll would have to be completely redone, which only a global can do.

[skauble]

The problem is if it is caught too late too many people have already either voted the closest they could or nulled, so adding in "no" doesn't help.  The poll would have to be completely redone, which only a global can do.

But what's the point in keeping a poll that we know is a misrepresentation of how people stand by then? At that point I think a new poll and then an edit to the title/sub-title that said "new poll as of date" would be more valuable.

 

If people are posting that they nulled their vote or that they voted for something that was closest to straight "yes" or "no" but not really what they wanted, then all we've managed to do is amass numbers that sort of, kind of, maybe tell us what people think which A. can't be very useful in making decision, B. leads us to areas of discussion that might not reflect voter's actual concerns but were just the closest option, and C. frequently derail us all into talking about the bias of the poll.

 

I remember a while back, there was a poll where people (quite a few of them) were actually saying they voted for an option that did not apply to them because it was the only way to counter the large bias of the poll. I don't even know how that poll survived for the time it did.

 

The thing is that I don't even think it's intentional or manipulative most of the time. People have an idea that they're attached to and so maybe they don't consider someone else might just flat out dislike it or they think that if they can just get everyone to say what they don't like then it can all be worked out, and so the poll ends up tilted toward the OPs POV. So I think it's understandable that it's going to happen sometimes, but it's often gotten to the point where they're not just unproductive as info gathering tools, but they become counterproductive to accessing user opinion.

 

I completely understand that it can't always be a super fast process because it can't be changed by all the mods, but I think editing it as soon as it's noticed is better than keeping a poll that can't really be used in a reliable manner. Because if someone leaves out a "no" option, then not only will people null, not only will they vote the nearest, but not accurate option, but lots of people will just skip it. So I'm not sure how that's more valuable than just starting fresh. More to the point, if people can't express a simple "support/don't support" in replies, then they're dependent on the poll option and I think that it should be as fair as possible.

[Fuzzbucket]

How about the forums have like a Like, Dislike, and a Thank button to rate posts

Please no.

 

I am aware of MANY incidents on f***book where people have automatically clicked like without thinking (which is a separate reason I hate this idea, as it DOES mean people tend not to think about a post...) and have been horrified to realise that they "liked" the post of a friend when actually it was a really nasty post and they would never have "liked" it if they had read it.

 

I know this partly because I am NOT on the place and never will be, but on more than one occasion someone kindly told me about some posts mentioning me that had been "liked" by some of my actual FRIENDS. A few of those are no longer friends but a couple I minded about, I emailed to say I had heard about this, adn was sorry to hear they had thought that of me - and they were horrified and said "sorry, that's just what you do on FB; I clicked like because my other friend posted, and it was funny, but I didn't think about what I was kind of agreeing to and if I had I wouldn't have..."

 

There have also been suicides as a direct result of thousands of likes of vicious stuff (a group of teens are actually now on trial as the result of one such incident - I'm not quite sure what the charges are...). Sure, it wouldn't be that bad here, but it could still lead to unnecessary and unpleasant drama, as skauble says.

[olympe]

Please, no like/dislike/thanks buttons. It's too facebook-esque for my liking. Besides, we're all old enough to actually write that we like something, and why.

[Obscure_Trash]

But what's the point in keeping a poll that we know is a misrepresentation of how people stand by then? At that point I think a new poll and then an edit to the title/sub-title that said "new poll as of date" would be more valuable.

 

If people are posting that they nulled their vote or that they voted for something that was closest to straight "yes" or "no" but not really what they wanted, then all we've managed to do is amass numbers that sort of, kind of, maybe tell us what people think which A. can't be very useful in making decision, B. leads us to areas of discussion that might not reflect voter's actual concerns but were just the closest option, and C. frequently derail us all into talking about the bias of the poll.

 

I remember a while back, there was a poll where people (quite a few of them) were actually saying they voted for an option that did not apply to them because it was the only way to counter the large bias of the poll. I don't even know how that poll survived for the time it did.

 

The thing is that I don't even think it's intentional or manipulative most of the time. People have an idea that they're attached to and so maybe they don't consider someone else might just flat out dislike it or they think that if they can just get everyone to say what they don't like then it can all be worked out, and so the poll ends up tilted toward the OPs POV. So I think it's understandable that it's going to happen sometimes, but it's often gotten to the point where they're not just unproductive as info gathering tools, but they become counterproductive to accessing user opinion.

 

I completely understand that it can't always be a super fast process because it can't be changed by all the mods, but I think editing it as soon as it's noticed is better than keeping a poll that can't really be used in a reliable manner. Because if someone leaves out a "no" option, then not only will people null, not only will they vote the nearest, but not accurate option, but lots of people will just skip it. So I'm not sure how that's more valuable than just starting fresh. More to the point, if people can't express a simple "support/don't support" in replies, then they're dependent on the poll option and I think that it should be as fair as possible.

Since the OP is active, I would prefer to only completely re-do the poll upon their request/okay, as people have requested in the past. I had just simply added a no option, but people who had already voted with other results in substitute of no couldn't vote again and were upset, so I simply removed the option (as only I had voted in it + 1 other person, which I didn't think would affect anything much). So we can change the poll, but OP has shown nothing that they want the poll changed (I would expect with so many people asking, they might respond at some point if they agreed, but I didn't see any post like that the last time I was in here), and I don't just want to completely delete and re-do it without their okay.

[Nectaris]

I am definitely against any kind of a "like" button, for even with the lack of a "dislike" button, the lack of likes clearly shows a dislike of the content.

[Pokemonfan13]

Warn points already go away on their own.

[Syphoneira]

How about the forums have like a Like, Dislike, and a Thank button to rate posts

 

 

Hi, Deblob167,

 

sorry, but I must say that the idea doesn't appeal to me.

 

Posts here are typically made to make a point/express feelings on a matter, not to please people or 'gain ratings' - if people agree or disagree with a comment someone's made, they should post to say why, and state their point of view and reasoning, not press a button with no possibility of any constructive input.

 

Rating people's posts on a site like this brings nothing to the conversation and, as others have mentioned, sounds like a way to make bullying easier.

 

Also, this isn't Facebook, or some of us wouldn't be posting here, lol.

 

 

[sh20000sh]

How about the forums have like a Like, Dislike, and a Thank button to rate posts

I don't agree about rating posts... Sorry.. I heard someone sell and buy like/dislike

Edited August 24, 2013 by sh20000sh

[Deblob167]

Ok lol you can stop quoting my post now guys I get it. The cons outweigh the pros. I still want a Thank button though..

[Fuzzbucket]

Ok lol you can stop quoting my post now guys I get it. The cons outweigh the pros. I still want a Thank button though..

ACTUALLY - unless people want to sort of thank EVERYONE - PMs are better for that. I have had maybe three thanking me for a post. They MEANT something; it was lovely to get them. "autoclicks" - even in their thousands - wouldn't have. The PMs told me the posts had been valued - and why - and also by whom. I was really chuffed by them.

[Psycho Cat]

I'm seeing this discussion come to an end now, so I have a suggestion of my own: What if there were request mods? They would be sorta like RP approvers, but for requests. They could critique BSAs, comb the completed section, etc. but wouldn't have as much power as a normal mod?

[Deblob167]

I'm seeing this discussion come to an end now, so I have a suggestion of my own: What if there were request mods? They would be sorta like RP approvers, but for requests. They could critique BSAs, comb the completed section, etc. but wouldn't have as much power as a normal mod?

I feel as if everyone can be a request mod because everyone already critques. I am going to have to say no sense we have enough already, they're just called members instead of mods.

 

Also, I think the current mods are doing a great job at looking through the completed requests.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Deblob167

[Crocodile]

I don't know how many people still sort their scrolls by color...but I do, and I really don't think they're in that great of an order anymore. Even the male and female of the same dragon with the same coloring are sometimes separated. Could this be worked out?