|
vBulletin 3.6.7 PL1 post upgrade party thread
The forum upgrade is done. This new version of the vBulletin software incorporates over 6 months worth of minor bug fixes and security improvements, and ensures compatibility with newer plugin products. Most of you won't notice the changes, but here's a changelog for you to review:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=229448 (Note that 3.6.6 to 3.6.7 is mostly a security fix) As usual, some things may not be functioning as normal (particularly Javascript), so report them here. |
ditto
|
Oh so that's what that is! I can't change my av either.
|
"unable to save image"
you know where a good place is to save an image on another website by allowing remote avatars <_< |
I can change your avatar... for a dollar.
|
Avatars should work now. I had to chmod the directories again.
|
Thanks man!
|
Profile fields look all messed up.
|
Quote:
|
Except that would make it harder for us to edit people's avatars, Acer. Not much harder, granted but harder none the less.
|
No, you'd have remote hosting AND uploading of avatars. We could upload a new avatar to GFF for a user OR remote host to wherever. Would it really be that confusing?
|
Why are remote avatars needed? As is, the server hosts all the avatars and does it fast, so you don't have to wait 5 extra seconds for ImageShack to come in like you do with most people's signatures.
|
I think the only valid argument there is that it'd allow for php scripts, or whatever they're called, to have an avatar than randomly changes on reload.
|
php would be fun but really it would allow for larger filesize for avatars. I mean sure within reason. I'd hope people wouldn't be pointing to 2 megabyte sized avatars. But really around 200 kb shouldn't be life threatening for anybody.
|
Ah, well for larger filesize you should just be campaigning for an admin to increase the limit, not to allow remote linking. I mean, it's not like server space or bandwidth is an issue, the limit is just there to prevent people from using animated movie clips or something.
|
The limit is not 75kb because the server can't handle more. It's 75kb because increasing the size of avatars 266% is insane. The only reason anyone would need more than 75kb (which is certainly acceptable for good resolution within JPG or PNG compression) is to come up with insane animated GIFs. Plus, it changes the maximum download size of the avatars of one thread page from under 2 MB to 5 MB.
And I (and quite a few people when we've had this debate before) hate animated GIFs. I'm not even reading Devo's posts right now, just skipping right past them, it's too insane to have that shit in my field of vision. |
Firefox, and probably other browsers, do have the ability to not play animated gifs, you know.
I hope this isn't too animated for you to read! ='D |
I don't want to turn off all animated GIFs, you know.
And, yes, crappy animated GIFs can be made to 75k (as Devo and Dubble prove right here). But Acer's argument in this debate about av and sig filesizes and dimensions (which we have seemingly had about eight thousand times) is that bigger is always better. There's never an upper bound. We didn't use to have 75k avs either and now that's not big enough? If we go to 200k, then what will the next increase request be, 350k? Then 700k? Where's the upper limit? A 105x150 BMP with no compression is under 50k. If you can't do whatever you need in 75k, I say it's time to get a new hobby. |
Perhaps if you didn't want to imply you desired all animated gifs off you should have worded your original statement differently. If I "hate" something, I generally want to avoid all instances of it.
|
My numbers are all wrong, by the way, ignore the numbers I have in there and just use "happy candy".
The current av size is 30k, which means that Acer is advocating upping the avatar limit 666%. How are gigantic animated GIFs so necessary to increase the maximum avatar section loading time more than 6 times over? People would just stop compressing their images, which means even single frame avs would balloon in size (why compress if you don't need to?). It's just a bad idea all around for everyone who doesn't care if Acer can't do a 300 frame animated GIF. Bigger is not always better. Additional Spam: And I say this with the full understanding that Acer has one of the final says on everything! |
Quote:
|
lolz mikey I thought we already cleared that fun mess of textual misunderstanding in the hut? gonna demote u to janitor *kisses*
I think we all know I love having fun and pushing limits but I'm understanding of our boundaries. I just love the ever living fuck out of options. Never can have enough but uh you know within reasons; don't want to turn GFF into My Space or something retarded. I've voiced that before though. Right, a sweet option that I'd love is to create two avatars if you're CU-RAZY like me. The first one is a default one that displays for everyone within the limitations of 30 or 50 or whatever kb we have avatars at these days. It's been a while since I've changed mine. The second one you have to click a tiny graphic to enable and it would be 200 kb or whatever insane size. Only the curious would click it. Or hell you might set an option in your uh options panel to have these browser killers on but they'd be set to off by default so don't worry your sweet heads. Ramble ramble ramble primary avatar is limited and on by default secondary avatar isn't limited (or perhaps 2 mb limit or off-site hosting) and is off by default ramble ramble ramble control panel fun for all of us kids. And there's another one of my extravagantly unnecessary ideas that perhaps I will detail out later in pictures by means of the photoshup and photos.cx that will never be used. =)))) Additional Spam: Oh ya, here's a rather simple idea that I bet you guys would love. An ignore ava/sig list. I'd love it to have levels. Like perhaps an ignore forever for people whose ava/sigs you just always hate. And then another where you can ignore for a couple days that you set. And then another that will kick them off the ignore list when they change their avatar or sig. Any fans? |
Quote:
YOU MAY ALREADY BE DEPRESSED |
Your one golden egg is ruining my dozen of perfectly good cooking eggs, Mikey. I demand a refund. :mad:
|
But I thought you wanted options.
|
Quote:
Although I am also in favor of not having to reduce Strike Man to 16 colors and 4 frames =/ |
Quote:
Pang, I will aid you in uploads of proper Strike Otoko avatars. I'll ally you in this very worthy cause. |
Quote:
As you yourself pointed out a 150x105 bmp with no compression is under 50kb. It's not entirely unreasonable for 150x105 png with alpha and of sufficent complexity to be over 30k. Heck, I've run into the avatar file size a number of times when just trying to upload a regular avatar, not even animooted. 75 sounds like a reasonable number to me. There are plenty of other things you can do to replace the page download size, if you're worried about that. I'm also interested in how you're calculating those numbers -- remember, web browsers cache images and don't need to fetch the same thumbs up and thumbs down buttons every time they encounter them. |
But if we just make the avatars remote we don't need to WORRY about their specific size. Begging for an additional few KB is counterproductive.
|
Quote:
Quote:
And, again, if 75k is okay to increase from 30k, is 200k okay to increase from 75k? Why come up with an arbitrary number like 75k? How do you determine what the upper-bound should be? No one has really posted a compelling reason other than "it's too hard". |
Stop trying to foil my plans of getting 10 megabyte avatars, mikey. :mad:
Also, if dial-up users aren't used to a broadband-filled Internet by now then they never will. Their time is over. They can adapt like any other website they visit. |
I don't mind if they have to adapt for good reasons.
Giant bouncing XBOX avatars isn't good enough. |
http://www.acerbandit.net/emoticons/xbox29lr.gif
13 kb =/ too wide for avatar so it would have to shrunk or cropped which would take down the filesize even further =/ ur examples r dumb, mikey =/ |
Oh for FUCKSAKE "dial-up users"
Look, I was on dialup for a large part of last year GFF does not load quickly under the BEST of circumstances on dialup That ship has SAAAAILED |
Dude pandering to dial-up users is weak as hell. You can't experience shit on the internet these days with dial-up. They're not worth designing anything around.
|
You guys just keep thinking about yourselves.
(I also like how when I give one example it is the only conceivable possible reason for not doing what you want.) Additional Spam: And also, Quote:
|
Well uh I guess it's true we're acting in our own self-interest but I'm not sure what your motivation even is
"WE WANT CAKE" "Dude we can't afford to buy you cake" "No we brought our own" "Well, we don't have any plates to put the cake on, so" "We brought those too!" "Well, some people don't like cake!" "What's your point?" "It's inconsiderate to eat cake near people who dislike it!!" |
Quote:
|
Hang on, let me flex my altruism a bit and set up a charity for those who can't afford broadband internet connections. Gotta stop being so selfish!
How many people are even on dial-up? If they are, they should be totally disabling images if they really want to load the site at a reasonable speed. As Pang observed, even lite-set isn't really that dial-up friendly. We should stop writing software that requires anything faster than a 400mhz processor and 128mb because that's all some people have, and we certainly wouldn't want to exclude anyone who refuses to adapt to a changing environment! |
Quote:
Your motives here are altruistic and that's fine but the people you want to help are long past saving. Even AOL's internal websites load like shit on AOL. It can't be helped. If you really want to do those poor souls a favor create an option to view the board in plaintext; it might only take 2 minutes a page to download in that case. |
Who says we don't have a plaintext feature?
|
Well, there you go! Problem solved. We may now proceed to improve the board for people who aren't from 1996.
|
I've always been against increasing the avatar/signature size, simply because I don't see any reason for it, other than to allow people to upload retarded shit (which they already are doing), but MORE OF IT TOOT-TOOT. Though this argument has been going on for so long that I don't really give a damn anymore. As long as I can replace trash like this and this with this, allow remote linking all you want, I guess.
|
Who's saying you can't do that already? I'm all in favor of spamming people with River City Ransom avatars. Everyone can be Alex and Ryan romping through River City and River City High. It'll be heaven.
Also Mikey, my point is that your example doesn't hold water considering your reason for hating a filesize increase is that you just don't want animated gifs period 'cuz ya got lame fever. If a giant cropped or shrunk bouncing xbox goes into the avatar socket in under half our current limit and you're just oh so against that then I can only conclude that this is a subtle attack against the .gif kingdom and a campaign for the 2 kilobyte world of yesteryear. I'll plant my flag down firmly against this radicalism. Seek help my friend or face the fury. |
He can't do that already because it's a .png, I believe.
(unless the upload rules changed invisibly) |
Here's what I plan to do: make remote avatar linking a donor-only feature, since it will be easily abusable.
In return, everyone will get the option to ignore the avatar of specific users (using cookies). |
Quote:
|
Pang, we've been able to upload PNGs as avatars for years.
Oh that's pretty awesome, Blah. How will the ignore feature work? Will it just be an ignore forever or an ignore until they change their avatar? I could see an ignore until they change their avatar being good. For example let's say I do a slightly seizuresque avatar and someone just wants to turn it off because it's kind of hurting their eyes a little. I wouldn't want them to forget that they put my avatar space on ignore and never see my new avatars forever. That would suck. :( However, if people remote link to a php and their avatar changes all the time would it bump you off their ignore list or until you change what the remote link is pointing to? I'd say it would be best to bump a person off the ignore avatar list when they change the remote link or upload a new avatar. So ignore user's avatar until new avatar change and ignore user's avatar until manually taken off the ignore list. Those are the two types of ignore avatars I'd do. I'm sure you could name or describe them much better. Oh and consider me a donator the minute you implement this. Money will be coming. |
Can we just choose to ignore all .gif avatars?
Also, since the 105x150 .bmp avatar I made was approximately 50kb when I saved it, can we set that as the maximum avatar size? |
There's the avatar revision info that's updated whenever a user changes avatar, so we could make use of that.
By the way, all uploaded avatars are converted into .gif files, regardless of the original filetype. |
;___;
|
Better a gif avatar than a jpg avatar I'd imagine.
Jpg's would probably take more strain to load and if a gif avatar is saved correctly, the file size would not be an issue. The only problem you'd encounter would be animated gifs which (if in good taste) would not be as bad I assume. |
Quote:
Also, woah. I never noticed that all our avatars were converted to gifs. I figured we'd lose some quality over that. I guess that's not the case. How does that work? |
Acer, the point is that only a very few people would do anything with the extra space worth doing with it. The rest would just be people who become lazy and don't compress their images when they can or would make terrible and gigantic avatars.
The negatives far outweigh the positives. As a mod, I feel that it is my job to look out for everyone on GFF, not a couple of creative people. I know you and Brent can't see that because you're both thinking about all the great things you can do, but what about some fuckhead who doesn't know what the hell he's doing? The MySpace comparison is valid here because the forum should be about the text to the right of the postbit, not about who can design the most shit for their avatar and sig spaces. 1) Thus unfounded need for an increase in size. 2) Increased loading time. 3) While people can make bad shit now, people could make even worse shit. 4) Further distraction from the important parts of GFF, the shitifying of GFF, as it is. 5) To get around some of these for people who do hate all this, more coding for Blah to do and more annoying options for people who just want GFF to look like just an Internet forum, which is what our focus should be anyway. That you and Diss and a couple others can't make fancy dancing avatars doesn't outweigh other factors. I'm sorry, but I will never feel different about the selfishness of this. You're welcome to call a vote in the Hut anytime you want, there's nothing more I can say on the matter. (Edit: Oops, looks like Blah took executive decision on this.) (Also, calling everyone lame who doesn't like animated GIFs, nice touch. You might as well go all the way like Diss last night and tell me that because of an Internet argument I should drop out of law school before I even start.) Quote:
Additional Spam: Quote:
"GFF isn't good enough to donate to OH WAIT YOU ARE GOING TO LET ME MAKE MOVING PICTURES OMG WHERE DO I SEND MONEY TO" |
Quote:
|
Yay, capitalism!
It's pathetic because he didn't consider GFF good enough to begin with. GFF wasn't good enough until he could make a big avatar? Well, fuck him. |
Basically all that needs to be said is that Blah is going to make it so you can ignore specific users avatars. If you don't want to see one, you won't have to. There is nothing left to complain about.
If it were really about the content of someone's posts alone then why have avatars at all? Why have chains and theme weeks and anything else? I don't know, maybe because people enjoy them and it adds to their experience here, perhaps. Just like being able to be more creative with their avatar space does. In addition, I maintain that you can already make pretty much the most annoying avatar possible within the current 30kb limit so that's not a reason to not increase the cap. As far as our discussion last night goes, I didn't tell you you should drop out of law school. I said that for someone who's going to law school you were making some pretty dumb arguments. Forgive me if I held you to a higher standard since you're going to be arguing for a career someday. I suppose I shouldn't have let my expectations get the better of me like that. Quote:
|
Yeah, I'm thinking, "Hey, I'm going to put as much energy into talking to Diss as I will Professor Smith."
RR WHY AREN'T YOU POSTING THE MOLECULE FOR DIHYDROTHEXOLINE HOW CAN YOU BE A SCIENTIST YOU JUST POSTED WORTHLESS SMILIES |
Would the GFF you're talking about (you know, the one with an emphasis on intelligent discussion and whatnot) exist if everyone adopted that lazy attitude and decided they couldn't be bothered to put in a bit of effort and create a more cohesive argument because lol internet?
|
I'm going to have to agree with Mikey on the text being important. This is a forum, and its primary purpose is to facilitate communication and discussion. This is best accomplished using the area to the right of the postbit. It's the most important part, and I would argue that it is really what counts.
Avatars and sigs are helpful features that give each poster a unique identity. But they remain a feature. I'm sorry, but chains and theme weeks are not the primary purpose. I contend that if you feel the need to be creative, there are other more specialized outlets for that. Youtube for the aspiring film director, DeviantArt for the budding artist, Photobucket for the serious photographer, and of course if you feel the need to put seizure inducing primary colors, YTMND and Myspace works pretty well! |
Would the GFF I'm talking about exist if people didn't approach it like they would law school?!
http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/863/strawev4.jpg (Also, I want the main focus to be on the discussion. Obviously, with things like Testing and the Sewers, it isn't necessarily always intelligent.) |
Quote:
Okay, now that that's cleared up I'm not going to go on a rampant quoting spree b/c you hadn't read Blah's decision when you were typing plus bleh. I don't get why you think that you can't have both a focus on the text and nice personal graphical extras. With you it's increase the avatar/sig size and suddenly GFF is MySpace and everyone is talking like morons and the textual side that make a forum, well, a forum is gone, but if we don't then everything is honkydory. I'm uncertain of how avatars and sigs of any size effect the interface in which you communicate on an Internet forum. I'm in this neat little thing right now where I reply to threads typing away and later on you will read and see what I am currently typing. It's no different from Word or notepad except some ways of formatting is different and there are some extra things like emoticons and what not. But yeah this is all me typing and communicating to you the reader in my own thoughts and words. Eventually I will click Submit Reply and it will appear in the thread for all to read. *click* Oh my! What's that? My friends avatar and sig have joined in on my post's text to keep it company. They sure are swell. :) Oh no! :o They're 75kb or greater in size and giving this post cancer. Oh god no. Don't die little post. Don't leave me. http://www.acerbandit.net/emoticons/crying.gif Daddy will make avatar and sig go on a diet and de-AIDS them so you don't get sick no more. Just promise me you won't lose focus and spread your affliction to others. Oh no don't leave me! :gonk: ... Damn you avatar and sig! :argh: If you weren't so big and distracting then little post's quality (of life) wouldn't have been smushed out of existence. :( Oh god the posts above and below are starting to fade as well. This is a catastrophe! Everyone can you hear me?! We have to all change to lite set and turn off all images, avatars, and sigs and then maybe we can save the forum. Oh and clap and chant "I believe in post content! I believe in post content! I believe in post content!!" Maybe we can still save it. I only wanted to write a good post and it's come to this because I went to far and had a quality avatar and sig. Well I've learned from my mistake. I won't ever be making avatars and sigs again. I just hope we can survive this storm. Oh god I spoke too soon! Hold on everybody! We got to make it to the top of that wave of disco seizure biggest miu!!! Here we go!!!!!! *forum capsizes and everyone drowns* |
Way to miss the point, but that's OK, because mocking gets you lol on the Internet and means you win the argument!!
Quote:
I don't see that as GFF's focus. You especially always have been more concerned with the look of GFF and being as absolutely noisy as possible (see: times when you've made the most annoying av/sig sets we'd seen to that point, ban raids, etc.) than about the quality of the posts here on GFF (and most of your recent crusades involve even crappier forums and worse posts). People don't stay here because "omg that Brent had such a good avatar" they stay because of the content. As I said, I don't believe more space for these mostly pointless things enhances the overall quality of the forum. Maybe a couple of posters' postbits, but, for the most part, I predict that it would decrease quality. I get that you don't care about that, because not enabling that to others keeps you from being as noisy as you want to be. |
|
You should close the thread!
and acer and me can close evade looooooooool |
Quote:
|
Gonna post and just say that while acer and some other people will probably do some pretty spiffy stuff with new enhancements, SSJClouderiothXxX is probably going to enjoy having an even more lame anigif avatar than before.
And diss, it's not about setting out to make the most annoying avatar possible (as devo and such are doing), but inadvertently making a butt-ugly avatar that hurts everyone's eyes as soon as they see it. |
I honestly don't see the issue with Blah's solution. Cash for features, with an option to disable for crybabies, senior citizens and AOLers. What CloudirothBallZ would do with it is not an issue because that guy does not have any money except his allowance.
Also Mikey it's kind of bullshit to call out Acer for not giving away free money when you yourself haven't donated either so far as I can tell. "MAYBE I NEVER HELP NO MATTER WHAT, BUT YOU ONLY HELP IF MOTIVATED TO! YOU'RE SO SELFISH!" Let's not pretend GFF is hardline against obnoxious large images because Merv would have been VAPORIZED. The whole idea that visual pleasantry is THE MORTAL ENEMY of content is utter bullshit. I suppose whenever you're talking to someone, you get up and walk out if you notice they're dressed nicely. "YOU SPENT TIME ON YOUR APPEARANCE! YOU CLEARLY HAVE NOTHING VALID TO SAY." Presentation AIDS communication, it doesn't detract from it. Quote:
|
All avatars aren't converted to .gifs, per se. The file name is just adjusted to end in .gif no matter what type of image it actually is. PNGs, JPEGs, etc. will all display normally without any downgrading. (I just tried it right now.)
|
So it just changes the name?
For no REASON? Pfft sputter abrupt shift from irritated to confused |
Seems I can't view user ratings, the pop-up window doesn't display anymore. I'm thinking it might be because of this upgrade. Please fix asap kthxbai
yea I know I skipped past the three pages of avatar and gif bitching and all that shit but i dont give a fuck k~ |
Haha, internet drama!
Also the journal banner upload thingy spews this out now. =) "Warning: copy(/home/gigablah/www.gamingforce.org/forums/images/journaluploads/15.jpg) [function.copy]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /journal.php on line 727 There was a problem processing your file, press back and contact the administrator for help." I will ring your mobile phone right away! |
Oh shi--
# chmod -R 777 journaluploads Try again, it should work now :( |
Sure does! Thanks. :]
|
Ah, I thought this is a temporary bug, but it seems hasnt been solved. Apparantly, if you sort member list according to the number of their post, you will see a member called ashlystut having 4,294,967,295 posts (401,368,855.83 posts per day)
|
And why would you be sorting the member list according to posts, eriol33?
Think about that and let us know afterward if you still think there's a bug. |
|
Quote:
|
|
I think I lost already just watching that GIF. :(
|
!
<3 ='D |
That's hypnotic.
|
Alrighty, based on Roph's avatar, can I assume there are no more limits, staff?
|
You can't.
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.