vBulletin 3.6.7 PL1 post upgrade party thread

Originally Posted by Aardark

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.

This is basically my whole argument yeah

Although I am also in favor of not having to reduce Strike Man to 16 colors and 4 frames =/

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by BlueMikey

But I thought you wanted options.

I never said I wanted a good dozen eggs ruined. We don't waste food, Mikey. Bad!

Pang, I will aid you in uploads of proper Strike Otoko avatars. I'll ally you in this very worthy cause.

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

Originally Posted by BlueMikey

The current av size is 30k,

So why not up it to 75kb? That was a reasonable number just a few posts ago. Or it it not OK because it would be upping the avatar size, OH NO!

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.

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

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.

I was speaking idiomatically.

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".

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Stop trying to foil my plans of getting 10 megabyte avatars, mikey.

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.

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

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 =/

Jam it back in, in the dark.

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

There's nowhere I can't reach.

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.

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

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?

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

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!!"

I was speaking idiomatically.

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

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!

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by BlueMikey

Interest of others?

Yeah but as I pointed out the "others" whose interests you are attempting to defend are basically screwed regardless of how friendly GFF attempts to be to dialup users. I mean, ok, you can argue the "it's annoying" angle but if we didn't allow avatars on the basis of their being obnoxious and stupid what would happen to Ace Combat Week

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.

Most amazing jew boots

Who says we don't have a plaintext feature?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Well, there you go! Problem solved. We may now proceed to improve the board for people who aren't from 1996.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

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.

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

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.

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

He can't do that already because it's a .png, I believe.

(unless the upload rules changed invisibly)

I was speaking idiomatically.

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).

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Pangalin

He can't do that already because it's a .png, I believe.

(unless the upload rules changed invisibly)

Well no, technically I can do it, it's just that I'm not going to go around editing people's avatars without a good reason (a 2 MB gif from Love Hina is a good reason, for instance). What, PNGs don't work for you? I think they've been allowed for like more than a year now, though maybe that's just for moderators?

FELIPE NO

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.

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

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?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

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.

There's nowhere I can't reach.