vBulletin 3.6.7 PL1 post upgrade party thread

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.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

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.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

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.

How ya doing, buddy?

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!

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

I just love the ever living fuck out of options. Never can have enough but uh you know within reasons

YOU MAY ALREADY BE DEPRESSED

I was speaking idiomatically.

But I thought you wanted options.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by ramoth

That was a reasonable number just a few posts ago.

It actually just happened to be the number a few posts ago. I'm looking for compelling reasons for an increase, not compelling reasons why 75k is good.

Originally Posted by ramoth

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.

Yeah, but I'm thinking about new dial-up users who have not yet found the lite-set. It basically turns away those new people if we increase the page load time six-fold when they start out. No one will want to stay no matter what they think of the content.

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".

FELIPE NO

I don't mind if they have to adapt for good reasons.

Giant bouncing XBOX avatars isn't good enough.

Most amazing jew boots

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,

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

13 kb =/

too wide for avatar so it would have to shrunk or cropped which would take down the filesize even further =/

So, if that's true, why the fuck do you need more?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Pangalin

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

Interest of others?

Most amazing jew boots

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.)

Originally Posted by Pangalin

if we didn't allow avatars on the basis of their being obnoxious and stupid what would happen to Ace Combat Week

oh right

Additional Spam:

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

Oh and consider me a donator the minute you implement this. Money will be coming.

That's fucking pathetic. Absolutely and completely pathetic.

"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"

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

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.

How ya doing, buddy?

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

Most amazing jew boots

Would the GFF I'm talking about exist if people didn't approach it like they would law school?!



(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.)

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

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 get why you think that you can't have both a focus on the text and nice personal graphical extras.

You can!

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.

Most amazing jew boots

You should close the thread!

and acer and me can close evade looooooooool

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?