[tooki]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
People make mistakes/forget sometimes. It happens.

:sigh: ...which is why I send a neutrally-worded reminder, so they won't do it again!

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
tooki, quit the low-carb diet. It's making you jumpy.

While I do respect the inline image guidelines, it seems to me that tooki is the only administrator who cares about enforcing them - with one exception.

So, is it possible, at the server end, to replace all attempted postings of violating inline images with links? Not only would it save tooki a lot of time, it would also make him a more pleasant person.

Another thing, this was supposed to be a humor thread. Something happened between when I left to go grocery shopping and when I got back.

Haha, low-carb. Actually, my food vice is salt. I joke that when I die, they won't need to embalm me: they can just set me out in the sun to dry and wait for the salt crystals to form at the surface.

I've discussed image automation tools with the other admins, including the ones who have programmed our customizations to the forum software. The upshot is, could it be done? Absolutely. Will it get done? Not a chance. Why not? Because none of us get paid, so we don't have the time to spend doing things like that. All of us have lives, jobs, school, whatever. So there is nobody around to make customizations that are that extensive.

tooki

Edit: P.S. I don't program at all, so I can't make the customizations myself.

[gorickey]

Hi everybody. I'm gorickey.

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by gorickey:
Hi everybody. I'm gorickey.

Hi gorickey, I'm AKcrab.
This thread sucks.
Leave tooki alone.
Tooki, stop replying to the inane drivel.

[gorickey]

Originally posted by AKcrab:
Tooki, stop replying to the inane drivel.

Amen.

Move along, move along...

[Oisín]

Originally posted by tooki:
Did that thread have a "picture thread" warning in its name? No.
Were there multiple images in violation of the rules? Yes.

The reason there wasn't a warning in the title was that it wasn't originally meant to be a picture thread, but became one when the initial poster edited his post.

Regardless, wouldn't it have been a lot easier and more efficient simply to have assumed that this was an oversight and simply add "[JPG orgy]" to the thread title instead of removing every image, replacing it with the "no-images-bigger-than-480-pixels" text and locking the thread? I agree with Zimph that that was an over-reaction.

[MacGorilla]

I think tooki needs to chill. You've become some kind of inline image nazi. I agree with the above poster. You should have just modified the title and got on with it. Less hassle.

[sideus]

Sig says it all.

[TailsToo]

Yeah, this thread is scary!

[madmacgames]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
While I do respect the inline image guidelines, it seems to me that tooki is the only administrator who cares about enforcing them - [url removed]

Thank you for crashing my browser, you asshole. Now stand still so I can properly poke you with this stick.

[JohnnyAppleseed]

I say we have no rules for a week and see what happens.

[bstone]

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Have you ever seen a cop pulled over by another cop?

Didn't think so.

I'm an EMT and work on an ambulance. Night shift mostly. Last night at 2am the other crew on the street came out of the ER after bringing it a patient. There was a Chicago cop standing next to the ambulance and he asked to see the certificate of inspection. The crew explained it was a brand new ambulance and the city gives 45 days to bring it in for inspection. It's only been 30 some odd days. The cop said "no certificate, it's going to be impounded". Of course this is not the law, cop must have been having a bad night or something. The crew called dispatch which looked up the paperwork which stated the ambulance was going to be brought in for the inspection *later that morning*.

No good. Cop made the crew follow him back to their impound facility and drop off the ambulance. Wrote them both tickets, wrote the service a ticket and threatened to confiscate their EMT licenses.

Of course the supervisors were livid. Calling the Sec of State, mayors office, FEMA, etc etc etc.

[amsalpemkcus]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
I answer to no man or beast!!!

you must be referring to the beast that used to be..

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by tooki:
They are there for a reason. If you don't like them, GO TO ANOTHER FORUM!

Uh, you can calm down now

We don't want ours degenerating into a juvenile...

Lemme see, the last time I was a juvenile was 1979

...image-laden place where people have 1MB signatures and people post images so wide that you have to horizontally scroll in order to read every damned line.

So I guess it depends on both the speed of your machine and the size of your monitor. Maybe you can share the math that got you to the precise dimensions y'all arrived at

It's not just "ooh let's be mean and force small images" -- there are well thought out reasons for it, and if you can't appreciate them (I know that some of our more respected members do), too bad!

OK, so if I appreciate your random attempts at moderating image sizes on this board I guess I become a "more respected member" too

Originally posted by tooki:
The rules were carefully thought out, including doing actual pixel measurements to find the maximum image width that does not create (when quoted) a text line that is too long for comfort.

Who's comfort?

Your problem is you're making your rules around subjective guidelines. Again, feel free to share the math behind your strong-arm tactics

[Luca Rescigno]

Actually there is some sound math behind the 480 pixel wide image rule. The MacNN layout apparently takes some 200 pixels of horizontal space, so if you add the 480 to it, it becomes about the right size to avoid throwing off browser windows that are of a manageable width. By a "manageable width" I think he means taking up only about 2/3 of the width of the screen on a 1024x768 monitor. 480 was chosen because it's one that is associated with screens and computers and stuff. Although I think 500 would be an easier guideline to follow. Either way, that much is reasonable.

I also think that some of the measures being taken are a bit absurd and that Tooki gets just a wee bit too angry when people violate the rule. The fact that threads posted in the wrong forum are locked instead of moved, and thread titles aren't changed when people start posting large images, seems weird to me. Then again, I am a moderator at a much, MUCH smaller message board where I only have to moderate maybe one post every two or three days. A single fairly well visited forum here at MacNN probably generates more traffic than all of AppleNova does in a day. So if I had to moderate here at MacNN, I'd probably be tearing my hair out just like Tooki.

Also, at AppleNova we don't even have sig images or avatars at all. Many people have custom titles, and we're pretty lenient about the image size. But again, it is a tiny forum compared to MacNN, so I do understand.

I think a large issue here isn't the actual rules, it's the way they are enforced - people don't like getting banned for posting a larger-than-allowed image. But having a 480 pixel wide limit doesn't seem to be that unreasonable.

[TailsToo]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
Another thing, this was supposed to be a humor thread. Something happened between when I left to go grocery shopping and when I got back.

gorickey, did you start all of this?

[Zimphire]

Respect mah athorritaaaah.

[gorickey]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
gorickey, did you start all of this?

I'm just one of the victims here is all.

Why?

[OH-N'omac]

Originally posted by madmacgames:
Thank you for crashing my browser, you asshole. Now stand still so I can properly poke you with this stick.

That thread rocked, get a real browser.

Could this be solved with a max width div in CSS? Break the div in front of an img tag and resume it after?

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by Zimphire:


Respect mah athorritaaaah.

LOL

[soul searching]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
gorickey, did you start all of this?

A summary of the latest events:

It started with this thread. Because of the number of violations, the thread was ultimately closed and all those who violated the guidelines/rules got PMs from tooki (as all violators do).

And because it was closed, I started this thread with a suggestion as to what to do if such threads start again. (Some folks have mentioned that very suggestion in this thread as well).

Later that day, as you know from this thread, BasketofPuppies pointed out that the size of Demonhood's thread-closing-image was in violation of the Inline Image guidelines/rules. This is pretty much when and where everyone spilled their beans.

Anyway, between all three threads you can get a feel for what went on, though this one has the bulk of the meat.

[madmacgames]

Originally posted by OH-N'omac:
That thread rocked, get a real browser.

Are you saying Safari is not a real browser? I would really like to see you say that to Steve's face

[OH-N'omac]

Originally posted by madmacgames:
Are you saying Safari is not a real browser? I would really like to see you say that to Steve's face

I use firefox on my Mac...and that thread didn't make my browser crash. Draw your own conclusions.

[Zimphire]

It didn't make my browser crash either.. and I am using Safari.

Firefox is a kludge. IMHO.

[tooki]

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
I also think that some of the measures being taken are a bit absurd and that Tooki gets just a wee bit too angry when people violate the rule. The fact that threads posted in the wrong forum are locked instead of moved, and thread titles aren't changed when people start posting large images, seems weird to me. Then again, I am a moderator at a much, MUCH smaller message board where I only have to moderate maybe one post every two or three days. A single fairly well visited forum here at MacNN probably generates more traffic than all of AppleNova does in a day. So if I had to moderate here at MacNN, I'd probably be tearing my hair out just like Tooki.

...

I think a large issue here isn't the actual rules, it's the way they are enforced - people don't like getting banned for posting a larger-than-allowed image. But having a 480 pixel wide limit doesn't seem to be that unreasonable.

1. For the life of me, I don't understand where you all have gotten the idea that I get angry when people violate the rule: I literally cut and paste the same response I've used for months and then fill in the correct pixel value. I don't feel anger, I feel tedium.

I get impatient when people start yelling at me for things I didn't do and feelings I didn't experience! It gets tiring to invest so much time trying to keep the place civil, only to have the Stupid Brigade� yell at me for it because they want it to be a juvenile free-for-all anarchy. (There are already sites on the internet to meet such desires; this isn't one of them.)

2. I have said this many, many times, including just a few posts up in this very thread: The reason I no longer move misplaced threads, but just close them, is because it takes three times as many clicks to move a thread, while simultaneously condoning people being lazy about posting in the right place. Why should they choose carefully when a moderator can do it for them? The same logic applies to thread titles: if we automatically make allowances for too much (e.g. renaming threads), then people have no incentive to follow the rules -- rules which are there for a reason.

3. How many times do I have to reiterate: nobody has ever been threatened with banning (much less actually banned) for an image violation alone. They have been threatened with banning only when it is one of a series of repeated violations of all sorts.

tooki

[dreilly1]

Originally posted by tooki:
It gets tiring to invest so much time trying to keep the place civil, only to have the Stupid Brigade? yell at me for it because they want it to be a juvenile free-for-all anarchy.
tooki

Yay! I have a new sig! Thanks, tooki, you really are Sorely Underappreciated(tm)!

[tooki]

Always willing to please, I am!

tooki

[OreoCookie]

Some of you seriously need to get a life. An argument over what, 20, 40 pixels?
I've never had a problem to follow the inline image rules, and if there are accidental mishaps, I don't think that'll cause any serious problems.

So why don't you stop complaining and go on with life.

[Chris O'Brien]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Firefox is a kludge. IMHO.

Nah man, firefox is not a kludge. I know you're big on saying "but it's my opinion" as if that suddenly makes it a valid point. You should delve through the source code - the vast majority is very excellent, and it has very clever people writing it. It isn't perfect, but it's far from a kludge.

Dave Hyatt works on both browsers (or has he stopped on Moz now? I can't remember), and I reckon they're very evenly weighted.

Dunno why I thought I had to respond to that. It's been a long hard day at work

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
Some of you seriously need to get a life. An argument over what, 20, 40 pixels?
I've never had a problem to follow the inline image rules, and if there are accidental mishaps, I don't think that'll cause any serious problems.

So why don't you stop complaining and go on with life.

I'm fine with the guideline. But I still think that it's enforced with perhaps a bit too much zeal. Locking, banning, screaming, etc, because of a 523pix wide image should not happen. Maybe if you post an image that is 800pix wide or something.

[tooki]

*yawn*

tooki

[gorickey]

Originally posted by tooki:
*yawn*

tooki

[madmacgames]

so are you fellas done arguing over who has the bigger penis, or are you going to keep whipping it out at each other?

[MacGorilla]

I got a PM from tooki stating I had violated the inline image rule, yet with no link to said violation. I asked for clarification and was I was told what he thought the violation was and when but no specifics. You know, I beginning to wonder if tooki sits around, gets bored and fires off these messages at random. "You violated the inline image rules! I don't know when or how but don't do it again. And stop calling me names." This doesn't help.