Yes, increase it to 184 pixels (like steam) 5 71%
Yes, increase it to 175 pixels 0 0%
Yes, increase it to 150 pixels 0 0%
Yes, increase it to 125 pixels 1 14%
NO! Leave it the **** alone you bastard! I use an old ass CRT! 1 14%
I'm on a 2560 x 1440 and I think it's fine the way it is but go get em' Ed!
i very firmly believe in keeping the the size of a user's flavor text and imagery to below the size of their minimum post to keep visual signal to noise ratios steady and positive. in favor of signal.
customization, sure, it's nice, it allows people to make their posts "their own", but too much flavor and the brain is overwhelmed by flavor and unable to pull the content out.
WHY WOULD ANYONE NEED MORE THAN 64KB OF AVATAR?!!??!
We could all just go with less of both. It is time to conform.
empty space (also called negative space) is an object that gives brains a second to take a breath between computationsWe could all just go with less of both. It is time to conform.
No moose, is not moose without a moose
And I voted for 150x150 since why waste space?
empty space (also called negative space) is an object that gives brains a second to take a breath between computationsWe could all just go with less of both. It is time to conform.
No moose, is not moose without a moose
And I voted for 150x150 since why waste space?
WHY WOULD ANYONE NEED MORE THAN 64KB OF AVATAR?!!??!
...my quarrel is with the fact a few individuals are able to change the look/layout/function of the forum.
...my quarrel is with the fact a few individuals are able to change the look/layout/function of the forum.
You mean like when our signatures took an arrow to the knee?
...my quarrel is with the fact a few individuals are able to change the look/layout/function of the forum.
You mean like when our signatures took an arrow to the knee?
There are some starting at the very beginning of this thread. Did you even care to read it before you decided to comment?
There is also this entire thread: http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=43309.0
Now whether or not you agree to those reasons does not take away from the fact that they are valid. And if you're going to try to say that they all amount to "I want it", then what does any argument against this change amount to beside "I don't want it"?
There are some starting at the very beginning of this thread. Did you even care to read it before you decided to comment?
There is also this entire thread: http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=43309.0
Now whether or not you agree to those reasons does not take away from the fact that they are valid. And if you're going to try to say that they all amount to "I want it", then what does any argument against this change amount to beside "I don't want it"?
Now that's just not summing it up fairly.
The arguments for are simply that some people want bigger avatars - there are no technical or layout reasons. What you think are valid arguments are reasons why some people want them bigger - to show more detail, be more prominent, etc.
Reasons such as 'because it would fit', and 'Steam does it', are not valid arguments, not reasons to make a change at all.
Some of the arguments against are technical/layout related, such as not expanding the margin to intrude on posts. There are also arguments based on focusing on post content, which are certainly valid. And of course some others are reasons why people "don't want it" - no need for more detail, don't want them more prominent.
So in a fairly unbiased summary (I tried, at least) that's 3 groups of reasons against versus 1 group for.
I'm struggling to find the place where I was aggressive or rude to you, or anyone else in that thread, yeah I made a quip at gli but that was only because it amused me he used my username and didn't quote me in what looked like an attempt to be condescending, but that didn't work so he was just rude instead which prompted me to leave the thread.
As for leaving them be, I didn't have a problem with sig's or avy's I only argued that I think that over-sized avys and sigs negatively impact forums and offer almost no benefit.
You're not seeing my point. I don't care how many arguments there are on either side. I do care about saying that all of them that are in support are only saying "I want it", because you can make the same argument in reverse.
There are more than one group of reasons. There was increase in detail. There was increase in the ability to express yourself. There was the fact that most monitors are of larger resolutions so a larger size isn't as detrimental as it would have been in the past.
But if you want to lump all of those things into one category, I can do the same. Hell, I would wager most people who tried to jump on the technical aspect don't even care about that. It's just a way to get their way for something they don't want.
Now, I'm only saying this because lumping those reasons into one was the unfair summary. If we're getting into it personally, I don't care if it gets bigger. All I want was the downsampling (per tp4tissue) to stop destroying my avatar.
Show me where I said you were rude or aggressive?
and you take it as hostility.
Not explicit but more implied, as I never took your post as hostility... hell even when you told people to add me to there ignore list I wasn't hostile towards you.
Again with the hostility
Thanks for the report. I missed the percentages under the poll.
and all he does is ***** about things no one else cares about
we <3 you and missed you while you were busy doing other things
Chillax. He was making a joke.
Talking to Ed, I suppose you have him ignored?Chillax. He was making a joke.
??
Talking to Ed, I suppose you have him ignored?Chillax. He was making a joke.
??
[/sarcasm]i highly doubt you're the only certifiable fellow here. you're among friends ed. never forget that.
I swear people never get it...
I'm the only "certifiable" one here according to the state, and I seem to one of the few who can understand sarcasm...
Now that's just not summing it up fairly.
The arguments for are simply that some people want bigger avatars - there are no technical or layout reasons. What you think are valid arguments are reasons why some people want them bigger - to show more detail, be more prominent, etc.
Reasons such as 'because it would fit', and 'Steam does it', are not valid arguments, not reasons to make a change at all.
Some of the arguments against are technical/layout related, such as not expanding the margin to intrude on posts. There are also arguments based on focusing on post content, which are certainly valid. And of course some others are reasons why people "don't want it" - no need for more detail, don't want them more prominent.
So in a fairly unbiased summary (I tried, at least) that's 3 groups of reasons against versus 1 group for.
Actually, your third argument against, is the same one you say is invalid as for. So I discount that.
Another reason for is that if it will fit horizontally within the established margin, and would only increase 36px or 50px vertically, you would gain resolution for the avatars. Typically, you have to shrink your artwork to fit, and less shrinking means less loss of detail.
Cheers mkawa, but it still feels like I'm an outsider looking in on a community I don't understand
welcome to how the_ed feels every minute of every day of his life, and yet we welcome him with open arms (and some shouting, but only good shouting!) ;)
see ed, your first compatriot! ;) (KIDDING KIDDING!)
And yes Soarer, I do realize that 40 votes are not representative. But we won't get very many more votes unless it became mandatory to vote.
How many of the accounts that voted were created since this poll went up?
It's a conspiracy!
We get dozens of registrations per day, so I can't really say. The polls are anonymous.
No one seemed to complain about the margin changes. Avatar size limit is now 150x150 pixels.
Lookin' good! BTW can anyone explain to me why a bunch of people had changed their avatars to less than 50?
Holding out for an all-text view.
Holding out for an all-text view.
That would require manual input on each page. I think you can turn off signatures and avatars to streamline some browsing.Holding out for an all-text view.
Click the "Print" button... You didn't even look...
Holding out for an all-text view.
Click the "Print" button... You didn't even look...
That would require manual input on each page. I think you can turn off signatures and avatars to streamline some browsing.
If a couple of themes were added a lot of these items could be addressed with minor impact, max avatar width included (sizing down).Custom themes? A site I used to browse often had them, as well as contests for people to build them.
Though I'm hoping the next version of SMF has better facilities for this sort of thing.
Custom themes? A site I used to browse often had them, as well as contests for people to build them.
Was there a change in the way uploaded images were resized?
If you wanted to cut down on bandwidth, this option would be not what he's looking for,since you'd still need to load the themed page. I'm just picking nits here, I love the Nostalgia theme with Avatars. :P and signatures. :)That would require manual input on each page. I think you can turn off signatures and avatars to streamline some browsing.
What is wrong with this option? It sounds pretty much exactly what he's asking for.
Theme's are usually just overlayed over an exiting structure. So you'd have to use options to change the existing structure.
If you wanted to cut down on bandwidth, this option would be not what he's looking for,since you'd still need to load the themed page. I'm just picking nits here, I love the Nostalgia theme with Avatars. :P and signatures. :)
Custom themes? A site I used to browse often had them, as well as contests for people to build them.
We already have a few options, but they're basically just color changes. The customization could go further and give a barebones look or other styles.
lmao The_Ed's avatar looks so much worse now hahaha
Fixed the display for myself, at least partially.
Using Firefox as my browser, I added geekhack.org to the exception list for "Load Images Automatically."
Still get inline images in posts, but all others are turned off.
Thanks.
Don't load the style sheet. Then you will get the 1992 look that you are after.
I still don't see why you have to ignore what people are telling you about turning off avatars via the settings. But if you wish to do things the hard way: you could also use AdBlock to block avatars. Right click on one, then replace the number after attach= with an asterisk.
Did you even care to read it before you decided to comment?
I still don't see why you have to ignore what people are telling you about turning off avatars via the settings. But if you wish to do things the hard way: you could also use AdBlock to block avatars. Right click on one, then replace the number after attach= with an asterisk.
You're ignoring what he's said. Goes beyond avatars.
Don't load the style sheet. Then you will get the 1992 look that you are after.
This option is in the menu: View->Page Style->No Style. (Edit: unless you're talking about blocking the style sheet via adblock?)
And it's brutal. Gives a simple look but does not save any space and doesn't hide some things normally hidden.
(this post made in that mode, where is that dang Post button....)
I was mostly joking, but way to go retro!
The complexity of SMF's theme templates lends itself well to what you want. You can defeature the site quite effectively through a minimalistic theme. I eagerly await your patches! :)
preeettyy matureBecause baiting and turning people's words around is so mature, right?
I was mostly joking, but way to go retro!
The complexity of SMF's theme templates lends itself well to what you want. You can defeature the site quite effectively through a minimalistic theme. I eagerly await your patches! :)
:D I've actually had the source to SMF 2.0.4 downloaded for a few days now and have been browsing through it. Quite amazed at the level of complexity in the themes and how it is so much more than just reskins. Thought a theme could be cloned and have a few key things changed to get a minimalistic look by someone more familiar with the code.
As I'm happy with the GH layouts as they are, I'm not going to try to set it up local and muck with it. Maybe when there's some quirk I just have to have...
preeettyy matureBecause baiting and turning people's words around is so mature, right?
If this poll is open indefinitely, then the news announcement for it should be up in the header indefinitely as well.
Added 120x120 pixels. Sorry about the order. I can't fix that without resetting the poll.
lmao The_Ed's avatar looks so much worse now hahaha
Worse?... Do explain.
No one seemed to complain about the margin changes. Avatar size limit is now 150x150 pixels.
Does the bug here affect an avatar image if you resize it before uploading? Does it affect attachments?
It's thin curved white lines... They don't do well with compression... GIGO used to describe an avatar instead of code, that's a first. You sure seem bent on dissing my avatar for some unknown to me reason.
What does the avatar mean anyway? Seems like I've seen it before, but can't put my finger on it. The feeling I get is something like...
(Attachment Link)
What does the avatar mean anyway? Seems like I've seen it before, but can't put my finger on it. The feeling I get is something like...
Ask him if it's from Deathly Hallows.
/me makes The_Ed a wiki account and posts a large Deathly Hallows insignia to his Wiki Page.It took me a few hours in gimp... (Yeah... I still don't really know how to use gimp, but whenever I need a different sized avatar I can make it from the source file. Which means I'm not totally incompetent...)
It is a symbol that I made MANY years ago (except that the avatar version is missing the infinity symbol underneath. With how small avatars are often limited to I figured it would be best to just chop that off.) I still remember when 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' came out... The symbol for the deathly hallows was very similar... Though I suppose there were quite a few other's that were similar long before then, I never really noticed until after deathly hallows came out...
MineShow Image(http://i.imgur.com/ZmmGJ99.jpg)Deathly HallowsShow Image(http://i.imgur.com/mtwppuQ.png)
(Imagine the infinity symbol here)
It's NOT the ****ing deathly hallows!
It has begun.
Not really liking the bigger avatars, it's kinda distracting
I finally voted :p
Yay! I think I can guess what you voted :P
Can the poll options be changed to reflect what is current?
100x100 pixels (current limit) -> (previous limit)
150x150 pixels (fits the current layout) -> (current limit)
Not my poll (though I was the one who started the lobby and threads), and that is too restrictive of options.
No one seemed to complain about the margin changes. Avatar size limit is now 150x150 pixels.
No one seemed to complain about the margin changes. Avatar size limit is now 150x150 pixels.
Why the margin change anyway? 150x150 was supposed to "fit the current layout".
Wow...100x100 has nearly caught up to 150x150. I've deployed the code changes to support 150x150. The additional space in the left margin should be apparent. I recovered some dead space in a few other spots as well, so the margin increase is not 1:1 with the 150px width.
Avatar limit is still 100x100. Let's see where we are at the end of the day.
And yes Soarer, I do realize that 40 votes are not representative. But we won't get very many more votes unless it became mandatory to vote.
Considering the multiple threads you've started about this, and regular bumps to this one, AND it being in the banner... it's not just non-representative, it's pitiful! There's well over 300 users online even at this relatively early hour, and the vote count is barely 10% of that. I hate to think how small a percentage it is of the people who've visited during the life of this poll.... maybe 2 or 3%?!
It's safe to say that the vast majority are either happy with how it is currently, or simply don't care.
Hardly a mandate for change.
It's funny that with only a 50 pixel size increase I can now see that there are 2 women in your avatar. I didn't notice that before...That's hilarious!
You might lose then. Votes for 100x100 have increased since the change. Not unsurprising really, since we agree that many don't bother to vote unless they have to. Now some of them feel they have to.
You really hate change don't you Soarer... 50 pixels (some of them recovered from the previous margin) is enough for you to start a vendetta...
Agreed. I really didn't care, but then I thought about it a little more and it made sense to vote for 182x182. It's not like people can't use smaller avatars if 150x150 or even 182x182 wins.
I definitely noticed the moment I saw that the avatar size increased to 150x150, and find the increase in size to be awesome! I just hope it doesn't go to 100x100. I'd rather take an assured 150x150 over a chance of 184x184 if it means no 100x100.
Dude, there's a poll, this is politics.
Dude, there's a poll, this is politics.
I know there's a poll, and that this is politics. I am the lobbyist who started it all afterall. But there are vendettas in politics, and you have one against me.
Because a bigger avatar size means a bigger margin size... all the time, whether used or not.
Because a bigger avatar size means a bigger margin size... all the time, whether used or not.
Dude, there's a poll, this is politics.
I know there's a poll, and that this is politics. I am the lobbyist who started it all afterall. But there are vendettas in politics, and you have one against me.
Discrediting the opposition is a time-honoured tactic!
Because a bigger avatar size means a bigger margin size... all the time, whether used or not.
Can I ask what resolution your monitor is? I'm just curious lol
NO! Leave it the **** alone you bastard! I use an old ass CRT!
Right, but what I'm asking is if the official rules state that as long as the majority of the total votes in the poll are towards 150 and up, we'll at least get 150, OR does whichever specific option with the most votes win? This is rather interesting :)
Didn't you see the old poll?Quote from: SoarerNO! Leave it the **** alone you bastard! I use an old ass CRT!
Right, but what I'm asking is if the official rules state that as long as the majority of the total votes in the poll are towards 150 and up, we'll at least get 150, OR does whichever specific option with the most votes win? This is rather interesting :)
Whatever the majority of votes will be happiest with wins, NOT the SINGLE option that has the most votes. If the majority want bigger than 100, but 100 has the most singular votes, 100 loses.
Didn't you see the old poll?Quote from: SoarerNO! Leave it the **** alone you bastard! I use an old ass CRT!
No, but everything else is beginning to make sense now. Hey Soarer, get over 4:3, go get an FW900 and run it at 2304 x 1440 :p
Is Jocelyn joining the cult of vintage gel? CONVERT HER MY APPRENTICE!
It's got nothing to with monitor size, that's just smoke from the pro- camp.
Right, but what I'm asking is if the official rules state that as long as the majority of the total votes in the poll are towards 150 and up, we'll at least get 150, OR does whichever specific option with the most votes win? This is rather interesting :)
Whatever the majority of votes will be happiest with wins, NOT the SINGLE option that has the most votes. If the majority want bigger than 100, but 100 has the most singular votes, 100 loses.
That's just your interpretation.
Is Jocelyn joining the cult of vintage gel? CONVERT HER MY APPRENTICE!
Will do, master... after my shower :))
That's just your interpretation.
Ruh roh. Can somebody set this straight so I know where to put my bloody vote? :))
Give her the link to that place that you say is too expensive for V2's.
OH! I found some vintage texture, those are firmer than jewel (what you have).
Keep it at 184, Rknize will grace us with his presence (and maybe some scolding) tomorrow.
Give her the link to that place that you say is too expensive for V2's.
OH! I found some vintage texture, those are firmer than jewel (what you have).
Will do. The ones on that site a V2 for sure, like mine, right? Man, mine is starting to show dents after the abuse it has taken over time from visitors who can't help but poke, scratch, and lean their entire body weights into it :( But other than that, it's still as pretty as ever and feels heavenly, and not leaking (THANK GOD)!
Keep it at 184, Rknize will grace us with his presence (and maybe some scolding) tomorrow.
Will do. Hopefully Rknize will confirm and bring us hope!
I got 2 V2's from that site, so it is safe to assume that the rest are as well. But watch out for those other brands he also sells and get the right ones. There is 1 *red and 2 *green left at $30.99 shipped apiece.
On a related note - The bottoms of those V0 mousepads sucks (they're deformed a bit)... I wonder if the V0 wristrests (if I ever get my hands on one) has the same bottom... So of the 4 good variations (0,1,1.5,2) I would have to say that the V2 is the most durable. (But full bodyweight and liquids are still detrimental, so make sure your visitors respect the gel.)
I would be very surprised if what he says differs.
I want to the margin to be 300px wide because atm only having 150px margin is really hurting my ability to be creative
While searching my username I found this interesting conversation. I hereby propose a thread where everyone searches their own username and posts a discussion about themselves by other people that you were unaware of until now. (Boy that was a mouthful...)
EDIT: I don't even remember what I was searching for anymore... DAMNIT!...Quotesocal GHers > all you n00bs.
1st official GH meet up + The_Ed being there > all the restyou're really not helping your case herei was with u until you said the ed.
I wasn't joking. he's a cool guy and knows his $hit. I think he might be the long lost son Ripster always spoke ofyeaaaaaaaaaaaah.
the_ed does seem like he knows his stuff. he just has a... strong personality.Don't worry about The_Ed. He just has minor Asperger. That's why he likes those cheeky Cherry boards. :p
Cherry brand boards are awesome. It's not "minor Asperger", It's Asperger's Syndrome AKA High Functioning Autism. It makes me Anal Retentive...
Just search your username from the main page of GH (What page you search from matters). Find something funny that other people have said about you, and quote it in that other thread. After 888 posts there has to be SOMETHING good.
Tsangan is awesome. I would date him if I was girl. I might even considered going gay if he's into that sort of thing.
Reaper is the nicest guy here. I don't ever see him arguing with anyone about anything.
Demik is the coolest dude!!
JPM804 is my gun buddy. He only stops by once in a while to talk about guns in his thread.
Other cool people: Cactux, Halverson, SmallFry, Paddywagon, Jocelyn, VesperSAINT ...
If only it wasn't 6+ hours each way I would be more likely to go. But it's 2 states away... Hell if it was in Madison WI that would shave off like 3 hours of travel from the round trip.
Hmmm... If I do attend, what should I bring...
Too many expensive rare things that I don't want any greasy fingers on...
Switch testers for sure, but what else...
No, that's TOO geeky... (VesperSAINT knows, and is a convert)
Maybe my Grey 39 3494? (Yes, I have 2 3494's)
Stuff to sell if that's OK.
That modded G81 (removed helical springs) that fellow Minnesotans got to try out. (Yeah, It's STILL for sale...)
Is there anything else that you guys know I have that you think I should bring? (IF I end up going)
There's going to be so much stuff that I think only a few people should get their stuff out at a time. That way people can keep track of their stuff better.
Hopefully there will also be a second MN GH meetup as I will definitely be there for that.
I want to the margin to be 300px wide because atm only having 150px margin is really hurting my ability to be creativeCan't tell if sarcasm but I hope you voted towards "Even larger" or 184:))
Edit: sarcasm confirmed from first page :'( NO SOUP FOR YOU! I jest :P
First the forum admins abuse my ability to be creative with insane 150px limits on side bar width, and now I don't even get any soup... The admins here are really something....
First the forum admins abuse my ability to be creative with insane 150px limits on side bar width, and now I don't even get any soup... The admins here are really something....
:)) I only jest, my friend. I made some Spicy Italian sausage and cabbage soup, if you'd like some.
Ok, I'll accept your sausage, if you know what I mean...
It still doesn't look appetizing...
Welp, off to bed I should go. It's 5:47 AM, and the sun is rising...
Right, but what I'm asking is if the official rules state that as long as the majority of the total votes in the poll are towards 150 and up, we'll at least get 150, OR does whichever specific option with the most votes win? This is rather interesting :)
Whatever the majority of votes will be happiest with wins, NOT the SINGLE option that has the most votes. If the majority want bigger than 100, but 100 has the most singular votes, 100 loses.
It's funny that with only a 50 pixel size increase I can now see that there are 2 women in your avatar. I didn't notice that before...
It's funny that with only a 50 pixel size increase I can now see that there are 2 women in your avatar. I didn't notice that before...
Seriously?Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/Xrhl0E5.jpg])
I'm on a 1920 x 1200 monitor and it's easy to see.
Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.
Didn't you see the old poll?
It's funny that with only a 50 pixel size increase I can now see that there are 2 women in your avatar. I didn't notice that before...
Seriously?Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/Xrhl0E5.jpg]http://)
I'm on a 1920 x 1200 monitor and it's easy to see.
Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.
It's been pretty clear from this whole thread that ed has vision problems, and a strange love for Harry Potter.
It's funny that with only a 50 pixel size increase I can now see that there are 2 women in your avatar. I didn't notice that before...
Seriously?Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/Xrhl0E5.jpg]http://)
I'm on a 1920 x 1200 monitor and it's easy to see.
Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.
It's been pretty clear from this whole thread that ed has vision problems, and a strange love for Harry Potter.
Of course. Maybe this could be his new avatar:Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/zd94ea2.png])
Some backlash is to be expected. We'll just let this play out for a while. I've got other things to work on.
I tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
With respect to the margin, it might interest you to know that we had an even larger left margin until I shrank it down on April 29th to recover some dead space. I had to put some of it back to fit the larger avatars, but it is still slightly narrower than it was originally (by 1em).
I personally like forums that allow portrait avatars rathar than the standard square ones as the allow for a bit more creativity. Most of the places that have had these though have been anime forums, though I dont know what that means in respect to GH.
Right, but what I'm asking is if the official rules state that as long as the majority of the total votes in the poll are towards 150 and up, we'll at least get 150, OR does whichever specific option with the most votes win? This is rather interesting :)
Whatever the majority of votes will be happiest with wins, NOT the SINGLE option that has the most votes. If the majority want bigger than 100, but 100 has the most singular votes, 100 loses.
What? No. That's not how it works. That's just silly.
Imagine that 184 had the highest single vote count, but 150 and 100 combined were larger.
Would you be saying "the majority want 150 or less, so that wins?"
Of course not.
Some backlash is to be expected. We'll just let this play out for a while. I've got other things to work on.
I tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
With respect to the margin, it might interest you to know that we had an even larger left margin until I shrank it down on April 29th to recover some dead space. I had to put some of it back to fit the larger avatars, but it is still slightly narrower than it was originally (by 1em).
Is there seriously an "Even smaller" option now? Smaller than 50 pixel avatars?!
Of course I would say that 150 wins, the majority voted for less than 184. Did you not read what I JUST said? It doesn't matter if 184 gets the most singular votes if the size is not included in the majority.
Some backlash is to be expected. We'll just let this play out for a while. I've got other things to work on.
I tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
With respect to the margin, it might interest you to know that we had an even larger left margin until I shrank it down on April 29th to recover some dead space. I had to put some of it back to fit the larger avatars, but it is still slightly narrower than it was originally (by 1em).
See? Whatever makes the majority happy wins E TwentyNine.
The problem with the approach is that it's scaling up. If 100 and 150 have more than half the votes (as they do), do you go with 100 or 150 ? Assuming that someone who wants 100 would be happy with 150 may not be correct.
The problem with the approach is that it's scaling up. If 100 and 150 have more than half the votes (as they do), do you go with 100 or 150 ? Assuming that someone who wants 100 would be happy with 150 may not be correct.
But 100x100 is included in 150x150. The converse isn't true. :(
I will probably make a new one at my Dad's sometime in the next 2-3 weeks. With thicker lines of course to avoid the compression distortion. There are exacting dimensions it has to be...
The problem with the approach is that it's scaling up. If 100 and 150 have more than half the votes (as they do), do you go with 100 or 150 ? Assuming that someone who wants 100 would be happy with 150 may not be correct.
I also like seeing lots of nicely packed lines of text :)) It just looks so neat.
**** man, how the hell do you cope with white txt on a black bkground... **** destroys my eyes
**** man, how the hell do you cope with white txt on a black bkground... **** destroys my eyes
I rather like the dark theme I get the opposite reaction, if I use a lighter theme I get lots of eye strain......of course I already have my monitor brightness at ~50%
**** man, how the hell do you cope with white txt on a black bkground... **** destroys my eyes
I rather like the dark theme I get the opposite reaction, if I use a lighter theme I get lots of eye strain......of course I already have my monitor brightness at ~50%
it dsnt really matter what kind of display I use at any brightness when ever I have to read white text on a black bkground and look away all I can see is mad stripes which properly ****s with my vision... it might just be me but I find reading websites like that impossible lol
**** man, how the hell do you cope with white txt on a black bkground... **** destroys my eyes
I rather like the dark theme I get the opposite reaction, if I use a lighter theme I get lots of eye strain......of course I already have my monitor brightness at ~50%
it dsnt really matter what kind of display I use at any brightness when ever I have to read white text on a black bkground and look away all I can see is mad stripes which properly ****s with my vision... it might just be me but I find reading websites like that impossible lol
I actually went to the eye doctor a few weeks ago because my eye strain was getting so bad they recommended prescription reading glasses which I tried but they didn't seam to help much...but dropping my third monitor and just using two has helped a lot.
And it would be kind of cool if they could make the text green or blue on the dark background even though that might be a complicated change.
That does look clean!
Still quite a bit of blank screen real estate around the text
That does look clean!
Still quite a bit of blank screen real estate around the text, but it's very much and improvement over Nostalgia or the board default. Are there no "condensed" themes available?
That does look clean!
Still quite a bit of blank screen real estate around the text
make the browser window smaller?
I just realized then when I post, the "Topic Summary" on the post page is a very compressed view of the thread. It has who made the post, the ability to quote, no avatars, no sigs.
There has to be a way to put that into a theme.
I just realized then when I post, the "Topic Summary" on the post page is a very compressed view of the thread. It has who made the post, the ability to quote, no avatars, no sigs.
There has to be a way to put that into a theme.
Of course there is! Let me know when you have something to try!
**** man, how the hell do you cope with white txt on a black bkground... **** destroys my eyes
Someone is definitely recruiting voters :))
Someone is definitely recruiting voters :))
Or making multiple accounts lol
Someone is definitely recruiting voters :))
Or making multiple accounts lol
Whoa! Never thought of that... if this was the case though, why would anyone go so far? :))
Soarer probably would...
PS - Soarer, I'm kidding :p
Is that what it looks like to get a blowjob from Ashton Kutcher?
Someone is definitely recruiting voters :))
Or making multiple accounts lol
This sucks.. I much prefer 150x150.
I know... Depending on how they clarify the rules, I'm going to vote for certain win. :(
I tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
I know... Depending on how they clarify the rules, I'm going to vote for certain win. :(
What?
I like my avatar size.
Oh yeah, fake accounts. It's the only explanation why anyone would vote 100x100 :rolleyes:
Perhaps it's just becoming more representative as more votes come in overall.
Can the thread title be changed to "Avatar size - vote here" please?
Soarer! I was soooo kidding lol. Anyway, I do agree with your thread title request :)
Someone is definitely recruiting voters :))
Or making multiple accounts lol
More of this is happening :(
Just more facetiousness :)
Just more facetiousness :)
"Just a joke folks"
I would think with this polling system the mods could track IP addresses.
I was referring to the sad face Soarer mentioned, but yeah mods could probably do that. Only problem is proxies and people doing airplane mode with their phones, in order to change their IP.
Currently 150 and larger have 38 votes, 120 and smaller have 30 votes. So 150 is STILL the voted for maximum size. If you want 184, then keep your vote at 184, don't change it to 150 as it will do nothing. Everything is aggregated so as to appease the majority.
lol wutI was referring to the sad face Soarer mentioned, but yeah mods could probably do that. Only problem is proxies and people doing airplane mode with their phones, in order to change their IP.
This response indicates Soarer was correct in his interpretation.
Oh I see what you mean now. Problem is that there are different ways to calculate averages.Currently 150 and larger have 38 votes, 120 and smaller have 30 votes. So 150 is STILL the voted for maximum size. If you want 184, then keep your vote at 184, don't change it to 150 as it will do nothing. Everything is aggregated so as to appease the majority.
120 and larger have 42 votes now, while 100 and smaller have 30. So by your logic it should be 120.
Currently 150 and larger have 38 votes, 120 and smaller have 30 votes. So 150 is STILL the voted for maximum size. If you want 184, then keep your vote at 184, don't change it to 150 as it will do nothing. Everything is aggregated so as to appease the majority.
120 and larger have 42 votes now, while 100 and smaller have 30. So by your logic it should be 120.
No. 'Even smaller' and larger have all the votes, so it should be 1x1. Pick a colour.
No. 'Even smaller' and larger have all the votes, so it should be 1x1. Pick a colour.
:)) Dammit. I was working up to something like that, wanted to see the response first.
*shakes tiny fist*
Voted 100x100.
Whoa. Lots of discussion in here while I was asleep. Won't be able to read all of it on my phone so will have to wait until tomorrow but this seems to be getting more interesting as time goes on.
Whoa. Lots of discussion in here while I was asleep. Won't be able to read all of it on my phone so will have to wait until tomorrow but this seems to be getting more interesting as time goes on.Umm buy Tapatalk now! If you have a phone that can use Tapatalk, I'll buy it for you :p
Just saw this now. Makes sense why you asked what phone I have :)) is it worth getting? I have no clue how it works but posting on browser thru phone is hard work :))
Just saw this now. Makes sense why you asked what phone I have :)) is it worth getting? I have no clue how it works but posting on browser thru phone is hard work :))
tapatalk is full of awesome its just irritating at times
Just saw this now. Makes sense why you asked what phone I have :)) is it worth getting? I have no clue how it works but posting on browser thru phone is hard work :))
tapatalk is full of awesome its just irritating at times
It's never irritating. Must be your phone :)
Regardless it's perfect for when you're not by a computer and I'd say I use it 80-90% of the time.
120 and smaller has 31 votes, 150 and larger has 40 votes. 150 is STILL the winner folks.
10 more votes for 120 or smaller would make 120 the winner. 14 more votes for 100 or smaller would make 100 the winner.
120 and smaller has 31 votes, 150 and larger has 40 votes. 150 is STILL the winner folks.
10 more votes for 120 or smaller would make 120 the winner. 14 more votes for 100 or smaller would make 100 the winner.
120 and smaller has 31 votes, 150 and larger has 40 votes. 150 is STILL the winner folks.
10 more votes for 120 or smaller would make 120 the winner. 14 more votes for 100 or smaller would make 100 the winner.
How does that make sense when 150 won, it won without any subsequent re-votes, suggesting that the mods use a FPP system... which would currently make 100x100 the winner....
I went through the 100x100 votes last night and they look legit. It's probably folks noticing the change and coming here to leave their vote.
I tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
120 and smaller has 31 votes, 150 and larger has 40 votes. 150 is STILL the winner folks.
10 more votes for 120 or smaller would make 120 the winner. 14 more votes for 100 or smaller would make 100 the winner.
With respect to the margin, it might interest you to know that we had an even larger left margin until I shrank it down on April 29th to recover some dead space. I had to put some of it back to fit the larger avatars, but it is still slightly narrower than it was originally (by 1em).
What part ofI tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
do you not understand? The votes are AGGREGATED... Rknize is the Admin in charge of this poll, and he has agreed with me on the voting.
With respect to the margin, it might interest you to know that we had an even larger left margin until I shrank it down on April 29th to recover some dead space. I had to put some of it back to fit the larger avatars, but it is still slightly narrower than it was originally (by 1em).
AND the margin was DECREASED when the maximum avatar size was increased. So stop complaining already.
What part ofI tend to agree that votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated.
do you not understand? The votes are AGGREGATED... Rknize is the Admin in charge of this poll, and he has agreed with me on the voting.
The current size is 150. Using the guidelines "votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated":
Make it less than 150: 31
Keep it the same: 23
Make it greater than 150: 17
So by those guidelines we should go to something less than 150, as it has the most votes.
Using aggregation in this manner is a poor method and results in a constantly shifting vote count.
The current size is 150. Using the guidelines "votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated":
Make it less than 150: 31
Keep it the same: 23
Make it greater than 150: 17
So by those guidelines we should go to something less than 150, as it has the most votes.
Using aggregation in this manner is a poor method and results in a constantly shifting vote count.
By your logic it would go into an infinite loop because once changed to 120 the votes would turn to 29/2/40 and need to be changed back to 150... The votes are aggregated into 2 groups, not 3...
Ed doesn't understand that rknize's comment about aggregation was ambiguous, and yeah, it's up to him so he could choose to slice it some other way.
Currently Ed is just trying to gerrymander the 120 votes into at least being 'not 100'... this is exactly what rknize's comment was unclear about.
I can't argue that when then change was made 150 was winning. I did argue that not enough votes had been cast to make it valid, and I'd still argue that that's the case. I say avatars should not have changed size so quickly, and by so much. In fact, the poll should still be interpreted as "should we increase the size from 100", IMO.
The current size is 150. Using the guidelines "votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated":
Make it less than 150: 31
Keep it the same: 23
Make it greater than 150: 17
So by those guidelines we should go to something less than 150, as it has the most votes.
Using aggregation in this manner is a poor method and results in a constantly shifting vote count.
By your logic it would go into an infinite loop because once changed to 120 the votes would turn to 29/2/40 and need to be changed back to 150... The votes are aggregated into 2 groups, not 3...
Not my logic. Your logic. But that's exactly what I mean when I say "constantly shifting vote count".
OK, let's use two groups. To achieve the best majority here, you'd need to find the point where the difference between the two higher/lower groups is the least.
At 150: Less: 31, More: 17, difference of 14. Not bad.
Try it at 120: Less: 29, More: 40. Difference of 11. Even better
Try it at 100: Less: 3, More: 42. Difference of 39.
120 wins.
That is STILL 3 groups, and ignores the votes for the "At" group. When broken into 2 groups (which includes the "At" votes) 150 wins.
It is logical. So is a weighted average, which (ignoring debate about how it should be calculated) comes out to something in that ballpark (in any case, closer to 120 than 150). With enough votes, wouldn't they be equal?
That is STILL 3 groups, and ignores the votes for the "At" group. When broken into 2 groups (which includes the "At" votes) 150 wins.
Fine, let's include the at votes:
At 150: Less: 31, Same or higher: 40
At 120: Less: 29, Same or higher: 42.
At 100: Less: 3, Same or higher: 68.
Both 120+ and 100+ have more votes than 150. How does 150 win in this scenario?
Wouldn't 100 win in that case? I've already made this point previously.
Edit: And it's not three groups, it's two: higher and lower. I'm ignoring the sample point I'm on. But note: "votes for even larger or smaller sizes than the current size should be aggregated" names three groups: larger, smaller, current.
150 is the largest size that the majority wants.
150 is the largest size that the majority wants.
And 50 is the lowest size the majority wants :))
There is an asymmetry here, and it's not in the direction you'd like it to be. The fact is that nobody voting for 150 will be offended by anyone who chooses to use a smaller avatar, but the opposite is certainly not true.
Question, What is wrong with leaving the limit higher (margin permitting, so 150px) if people still can use 100px, or 50px avatars?
I don't understand the whole thing myself. The margin is 1em smaller, and people can have 50 more pixels in their Avatars. I guess that some people just want to dictate that other people can't have larger avatars, even though it doesn't affect them in any way.
Baldgye, I did read most of it. It seemed like banter back and forth with no clear answer to my question.
Fair enough, I guess reading though the thread would be way too much hassle
Baldgye, I did read most of it. It seemed like banter back and forth with no clear answer to my question.
Fair enough, I guess reading though the thread would be way too much hassle
This isn't nearly up to the standards of this board when it comes to the degree of severity when pointing out to someone that they missed a detail in the thread.
It is logical. So is a weighted average, which (ignoring debate about how it should be calculated) comes out to something in that ballpark (in any case, closer to 120 than 150). With enough votes, wouldn't they be equal?
Because we're dealing with discrete values here, while I think the weighted average would approach the same value as my method, doubtful it would ever be equal.
Interesting that two different approaches come to nearly the same result though.
Alrighty, let me change my question. Soarer and The_Ed, what is wrong with leaving the limit higher (margin permitting, so 150px) if people still can use 100px, or 50px avatars?
Fair enough, I guess reading though the thread would be way too much hassle
This isn't nearly up to the standards of this board when it comes to the degree of severity when pointing out to someone that they missed a detail in the thread.
How so?
This dumb thread has gotten to 12 pages now and the previous thread was up to 5-6? I argued against the widening or the side bar to only ever get abuse in return because I didn't value the argument that 'but I want it'... then someone asks (again) well why don't you guys want it, as if these threads are brand new and those arguments never took place.
And I didn't know you where a mod.
It was a joke. I'm saying you weren't being nearly enough of an ******* like it seems too many people on this board are when telling someone they missed something.
It's not just about space. All this margin talk is pointless.
To me, it's about distracting and gaudy design. I like Deskthority's 64px limit.
Good thing I'm not dictator. :-)
I don't mind taller avatars either. A 3:4 or even 9:16 ratio avatar that's 100px wide looks good. Regardless, such things are subjective just like signatures.
The "then turn them off" argument is too harsh as they obviously both are useful. Thus, a personalized user style through a browser plugin unless/until such things are added on the forum.
The simple fact is that the margin width makes little difference. What we are talking about here, in effect, is a 50px vertical difference. People can currently have signatures that are double that vertical space, at 120px high. So for a slight increase in vertical space (and that only for users that choose to use the increase), you get double the pixels available.
I don't mind taller avatars either. A 3:4 or even 9:16 ratio avatar that's 100px wide looks good. Regardless, such things are subjective just like signatures.
The "then turn them off" argument is too harsh as they obviously both are useful. Thus, a personalized user style through a browser plugin unless/until such things are added on the forum.
Well I'd certainly welcome being able to turn of post counts, personal texts, custom titles, messaging icons, etc. to reduce the clutter!
The simple fact is that the margin width makes little difference. What we are talking about here, in effect, is a 50px vertical difference. People can currently have signatures that are double that vertical space, at 120px high. So for a slight increase in vertical space (and that only for users that choose to use the increase), you get double the pixels available.
That's a terrible argument, since anyone with any taste turned signatures off long ago.
I don't mind taller avatars either. A 3:4 or even 9:16 ratio avatar that's 100px wide looks good. Regardless, such things are subjective just like signatures.
The "then turn them off" argument is too harsh as they obviously both are useful. Thus, a personalized user style through a browser plugin unless/until such things are added on the forum.
Well I'd certainly welcome being able to turn of post counts, personal texts, custom titles, messaging icons, etc. to reduce the clutter!
Not sure if you saw my post regarding Stylish (http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=43268.msg893897#msg893897)
You could customize the user style (see http://userstyles.org/) a bit to get exactly what you want.
Not sure if you saw my post regarding Stylish (http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=43268.msg893897#msg893897)
You could customize the user style (see http://userstyles.org/) a bit to get exactly what you want.
Sure, if it comes to it I'd love something like that! Far better to have it done in the forum code though.
How did you do that, via Stylish?
184x184 causes other problems with the template layout. It could be fixed, but frankly I don't want to burn any more time on new avatar features. I still have to fix the GIF upload bug and want to do some other stuff.
Profile -> Look and Layout ->Show Image(http://www.knizefamily.net/images/pool/gh-avatar-display-size.png)
It uses JS so that the aspect ratio is maintained when constraining both width and height (to avoid abusers). You might see a glitch on page reloads, but normal page loads should be fine.
Profile -> Look and Layout ->
(http://www.knizefamily.net/images/pool/gh-avatar-display-size.png) (http://www.knizefamily.net/images/pool/gh-avatar-display-size.png)
It uses JS so that the aspect ratio is maintained when constraining both width and height (to avoid abusers). You might see a glitch on page reloads, but normal page loads should be fine.
I can't see that option :/
I object! Why the obsession with closing threads these days!