Crono said:
That's on your end, UD.

I would agree with you Crono except since I posted Slothe has since posted and altered the conditions.

It looks normal now. Apparently it only occurred when I, (the only person on page 3) was the only post present.

Must be a small bug or it would have remained present.

Sorry to waste your time.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Methinks it's about time that the Recently Watched thread somehow be
broken down. For me, when I click on the thread, it takes forever
to load (no exageration) and I thought that there must be a way to
somehow divide it.

If every, say, ten pages where a new chapter, would that slow the loading speed?

I really am just guessing here, but It's a little annoying waiting that long.

The length of the thread shouldnt affect loading time...

But the pit can be very slow at times. I'm assuming this is because of the new server, and cant be fixed.

---

"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"

• My yr11 Economics teacher

Length of a thread shouldn't effect loading time, even "rummaging" through the database wouldn't, since I'm sure Lep used a direct access method and not a traversal method.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Indeed, I felt the same way, which is why I hesitated to post
that. However, unless Murphy's Law governs my life very strictly,
mty loading time at least triples when posting in thread with many many
pages (this one included)

However, I don't have problems loading an 18 page one such as Recently Listened.

:sad:

Here, I've made a handy-dandy image to show what I mean. The top
one is this thread, the bottom is "at the risk of exposing my secret
identity"



Coincidence? I think not!

Those aren't accurate, just to let you know. The first time I came to this specific page in this thread it said 32 seconds or something around there and it took maybe 5.

But, you're going to have to wait for Lep, since he's the only one who knows how he built the interface between the database and the site.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Indeed I know they are inaccurate, however it did take at least 30 seconds to load the page.

Suggestion: I have found it nearly impossible to scan the "Maps" forum since my advent into 56k hell. There are just to many images posted to be honest. Would it be possible to write some code so that when you chose "Basic" or "Condensed" that the images revert back to the line of code specific to the URL?

Thanks for your time.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Suggestion: I have found it nearly impossible to scan the "Maps" forum since my advent into 56k hell. There are just to many images posted to be honest. Would it be possible to write some code so that when you chose "Basic" or "Condensed" that the images revert back to the line of code specific to the URL?
Thanks for your time.

Of course it's possible. That's a good idea though. Changing all user posted images to links.

I second the recommendation. :bandit: *

*Note: I just felt like using that smiley

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

I can't even tell what's going on :smile:

I'm using the default setting, and I don't want to have only URL's in
place of pictures. So instead of making it do that when you use a
certain scheme, make it a seperate option of it's own.

I third it...

It wouldn't be part of the default setting. We're suggesting it's part of the "basic" setting, which is, obviously, for people on slow connections (load it up, you'll see what I mean).

Not sure why those colors are chosen. Maybe it'd be a good idea to make a "56K" theme which looks like the default theme, but effecient as the basic.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

/boo :biggrin:

I've been learning a lot about "proper" CSS and all the crappy margin-handling of the various browsers, if I ever get some free time I'll look into that along with the whole image-conversion-thingy :/

(but do try to make it an option)

Hey guys, i have this idea, i dont know if it would really work here but anway:

I made some small custom tags used for other forums that support Siggies..

So How about adding some custom tags for everyone here ?

For example; snarkpit users get this :



OR

Hammer users get this :



Ofcourse, i can edit the colors and quotes, and to make everyone have
it, you can make a thread and put the URL and let anyone who is
intrested to add it in his signature area, and you wouldn't allow
any other tags except the ones you choose, that would be fun, and maybe
the first hl2 forum that has all of their members with there tag on ?!
:biggrin:

Just tell me what you think, its just a small idea, and i think it would be nice to have these tags under each member :biggrin:

---

.::Dark|Masta::. - One name. One legend.

I really like those signatures - good work.

---

My site

To do that, sig images would have to be enabled, which theyre not, which is something I approve of.

However, those are nice images.

---

"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"

• My yr11 Economics teacher

They're nice images, and you know I like the simplicity... the problem
is that everyone on the forums is obviously a snarkpit user, and most
of us here have used hammer at one point or another. With this in
mind, those two tags are just redundant.

Daft suggestion here, but why not have automated sig images like that based on the number of Snarkmarks? Might possibly work...

---

My site

Yeah any of that in this site would be really nice, and morphine, its
just to like, ehnance the appearance a little bit, its nice to have
these kind of sigs, only small ones, nothing else, its just an
idea...Who knows what may happen :biggrin:

---

.::Dark|Masta::. - One name. One legend.

I have a small request. With someone using condensed mode, the background is white. If anyone uses a font color other than black, it gets very hard to read, and sometimes impossible to do so. If it could be set up so that those forced to use this mode of travel here at Snarkpit that for us the text always stays black. I for one can promise to always assume that text is supposed to be "Lightblue" and not be upset when someone uses it and I see only black.

Thanks for your time.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

I guess this thread is really dead...

---

.::Dark|Masta::. - One name. One legend.

I know, but i'm gonna make a suggestion anyway.

PFL (Rest in Peace) had a "most wanted" forum where people could
request prefabs or simply post recruitment threads for
collective-mapping projects or for mods.

Wouldn't this place benefit from something like that?

I was looking at my profile and I noticed that even though I have 0
tutorials, when I mouse over "tutorials" it highlights but isn't
clickable. It's not a serious bug but just something you may want
to look over?

I have noticed that threads with lots of pages throw my 56k for a loop. Some actually load in minutes. (such as this one)

Is there any way to archive all but the last few pages? I know it sounds odd but it almost acts like its accessing the whole thing when it should be accessing only the last page.

Thanks for your time.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Not sure if this has already been reported; I'm not reading through 54 pages to check, sorry. :razz:

PM messages can't be viewed if Java (from here http://java.sun.com/) has been installed. I have to go to Internet Options->Advanced, then uncheck this option...Java (Sun)->Use Java 2 v1.4.2_03.

If that option is checked, pressing LMB on a PM results in nothing happening whatsoever. Unchecking that option, LMB on a PM opens the PM in a new window as expected.

I have Java 1.5 for my Opera, and it works fine. I got logged out a few times rather quickly, but I've only just arrived, so it could be some setting upon which I have yet to stumble.

i was checking underdog's profile... and i clicked on this button "random" to see another random profile, but it says:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" align=center border=0>

<TR>
<TD align=middle>There was a problem
User not found

</TD></TR></TABLE>


has anyone noticed of this...?

i was checking underdog's profile... and i clicked on this button "random" to see another random profile, but it says:

There was a problem
User not found

has anyone noticed of this...?

Me.

asterix_vader said:
i was checking underdog's profile... and i clicked on this button "random" to see another random profile, but it says:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" align=center border=0>

<TR>
<TD align=middle>There was a problem
User not found

</TD></TR></TABLE>


<P align=left>has anyone noticed of this...?

<P align=left>Before someone makes a crude joke about me breaking the website, I didn't.
I noticed this and at first thought something was up, then I noticed that "random" doesn't seem to work at all. "Prev" and "Next" do but not random.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Sometimes there's a bug while posting. I didn't write down the line and function where it took place, should have. Sorry.

In any case, I posted then it thought I was editing the post or something and as a result, when the page refreshed, it gave the error, added my post time everything, but it didn't change the entry on the forum list.

So. I'm figuring it was interrupted in that process.

I've noticed this more than once, probably be a good idea to figure out what exactly causes it to happen, fix it if possible, otherwise send out a PM/News explaining not to do that. Whatever that maybe.

The "Mario" thread is where the effects can be seen ... until someone else posts.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Hmm, happened to me also, though I had no error message. I made a reply
to the same thread, posted it, was taken back the thread as if it had
been added, but my post wasn't there. The "newest post by" thing had
updated and said my post was there, but in checking the thread if most
definately was not.

---

[img]http://card.mygamercard.net/sig/Default/reno84.png[/img]
Designer @ Haiku Interactive | ReNo-vation.net

Underdog said:
I have noticed that threads with lots of pages throw my 56k for a loop. Some actually load in minutes. (such as this one)

Is there any way to archive all but the last few pages? I know it sounds odd but it almost acts like its accessing the whole thing when it should be accessing only the last page.

Thanks for your time.

i just noticed of that too. it took more than 10s to load the last page of this thread.

Today in particular Snarkpit is even slower than usual. I have a question: Is it possible that the non-active people who are searching through the database for tutorials and such are causing some sort of a slowdown? We have non-active members all the time, but sometimes we have more than others. Snarkpit isn't always slow, just most of the time. I realize some of this could be because of peek user timezones but it cannot account for this level of occurrences I don't think.

This thread alone is like 1,500+ replies? It takes a horrible amount of time to load. In fact, I have noticed that any thread over or near 100 replies has a noticeable slowdown loading.

I can watch the little connection icon that shows my dialup connection processing. When its a short thread it continues unabated, when its long, the little flashes that signify data being transfered halts until a lengthy time later then it begins anew. It has got to be a database access problem.

Hope this helps.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Put less posts in per page under your control panel thing. Shouldn't have to search the database as much.

Also, of course other people accessing the site use up bandwidth. If that's the cause for your specific slowdown ... I doubt it.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

I don't know if this is a bug or not, but I posted a map and it didn't
show up on the front page. I was having connection problems at the
time, so that may be the cause of it.

---

o

When you post rapidly twice in a row, instead of adding your new post
to the previous one, it gives you an error and you lose what you've
tried to add. You have to manually go back and edit your most
recent post if you want to add something.

Also, (this was already brought up) the random user search isn't working for me.

I use firefox.

I've noticed in all of Hugh's posts, the right-hand side of the layout gets messed up. Only for that post, and only for Hugh. Has anyone else noticed this? Is it your fault, Hugh? Or something else?

I can get a screenshot if noone else notices this. I'm using IE/XP.

---

"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"

• My yr11 Economics teacher

I request that full sized image code be disabled in favor of the 56k users. Keeping the thumbnail code and link code active will not harm anyone nor discriminate against anyone who wishes to post screenshots. If people post a generous sized thumbnail, you can see whats going on in the screen anyway.

At the lowest setting, you can still have 10 replies per page. If each person has a tiny 50k image posted that still adds up to a whopping 500k download just to view the page. And thats assuming that each person would be considerate enough to only post one and at 50k. It also assumes that each person posts screens, which is rarely the case but, 500k pages is not uncommon either.

The thumbnail code was created to assist others in the thread. It should be used more.

Disabling full sized screen use will harm no one and can only encourage even more screens posting.

Thanks for your time.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

I've noticed in all of Hugh's posts, the right-hand side of the layout gets messed up. Only for that post, and only for Hugh. Has anyone else noticed this? Is it your fault, Hugh? Or something else?
I can get a screen-shot if no one else notices this. I'm using IE/XP.

Yeah. I was wondering why it was doing that. I'm running Mozilla (1.7).

UD, the thumbnail code downloads the full image then makes it smaller ... in other words it wont be faster for you to download. The only way it'd get smaller is if either, people stopped posting enormous file sized pictures or if there was some code that upon uploading an image it would scale it and re-save it. Now, that wouldn't work for images in the threads. However, there, you could easily replace the image with a site produced image (however, you'd have to write it so it only does it once and not every time someone views the page). There's one for bitmap images. There should be one for anything over 150KB or something.

Or, UD, you could just eliminate images from your browser :razz: You're like the only person here on 56K, at least the only one that's "commenting" constantly on how everything runs for you.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Crono said:
Or, UD, you could just eliminate images from your browser :razz:

You're like the only person here on 56K, at least the only one that's "commenting" constantly on how everything runs for you.

1) How? and will it disable everything? I would like to see the decent sized images.
2) Perhaps I am only the newest and subsequently the most recent to comment or the others gave up so long ago that you no longer remember them?

Poor them.

I seem to recall a poll that clearly stated that there were quite a few 56k users.

You know what I would like?, there used to be a program you could use to simulate 56k to test your newly created web pages to see how well/optimized you were in creating the pages. In other words, were they user friendly. I wish each of the people who failed to think before posting would have to use it for a day.

Well, maybe I will waste my Christmas wish this year on that. :sad:

Seriously though, if the thumbnail code is that defective it needs reworked. My thumbs are always less than 7-10k when I make web pages.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

My point was, they deal with it.

You can turn images off in firefox ... I don't know how in IE, I'm sure there's some way. And it's pretty easy to do, so you could turn them off when you come here or other high-bandwidth sites then turn them back on when you're done. Takes a second or two to do.

You don't need a program to slow your self down to see the effects for a 56k user. Just make sure all the information on one page doesn't go past a certain size: easy as that.

There's plenty of ways to get around all this. I think, honestly, there should be a 56K theme on the site, that replaced thread posted images into links and stuff like that. If there's already one of those ... use that.

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

Nothing I have found on this site removes an image thats been posted externally (or internally for that matter). You can edit the themes, yes (themes are the permanent images and such). You cannot alter anyones discourteousness where images are concerned.

posted by Crono

<DIV class=quotetext>
<DIV style="BORDER-RIGHT: red 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: red 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: red 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: red 1px solid; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #151515">My point was, they deal with it.

</div></div>

Its sad when you think, if enough people do something wrong, less and less people view it as such until eventually it becomes right.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

I don't think Crono meant that you could disable images via SP
settings, but rather through your browser preferences (if you were
running Firefox).

Also, Hugh's posts are wacky for me too. I'm running Firefox v. 1.0.7

Yeah, in fact I said

Me said:
You can turn images off in firefox ... I don't know how in IE, I'm sure there's some way.

I never said you are wrong (you seem to have an issue with that term), I said you are in the minority.

When there is a system, you cater to the majority of people. It's your choice to come here, so you have to deal with it. By deal with it: you could change to another browser which allows you to block things. Don't make it Lep's fault or something like that.

Now that I think about it, in mozilla and firefox, probably netscape too, there are options to make it such that EXTERNAL images, the images that are not located on the server you're browsing, can be blocked. So stop being a baby, change your browser and be happy. :razz:

Visit http://mozilla.org

---

Blame it on Microsoft, God does.

You know Crono, I am beginning to believe that either you are incapable of following a conversation, or you deliberately make me out to be at odds with you. This thread is "Site Suggestions and Bugs" I am not making an unreasonable suggestion for starters and secondly, you are setting yourself up as judge and jury in lieu of Lep being absent. What makes you think that he might not already have this idea in mind but is awaiting time enough to implement it to his satisfaction?

I believe that he has it within his abilities to accomplish my suggestion without harming anyone. So the question is, why are you not assisting me when you can instead of making it sound as if I am crying needlessly? Why does there have to be a right and a wrong? Why not two rights?

You remind me of so much of the youth. Not just todays youth, but all youth. You have two ideas in mind. Where you are, and where you will be after you have spoken. If anyone happens to mention anything that doesn't fall within your prescribed path you either fail to acknowledge its been said, or you change it into an opposing viewpoint to be argued over.

Go back. re-read my suggestion, because thats all it was and see if it doesn't sound like a suggestion the second time. If you still feel its an unreasonable request then we can take it to the next level. (preferably in another forum as this one loads like molasses on a cold day)

I do appreciate your help when you give it, but if the price for that help is to tolerate your negativity in all other times you are asking to high a price.

Please discourage yourself from standing in opposition so often.

I also request that you do not attempt to pawn this off as my not comprehending you in some way. Believe me, I understand what I mean, perfectly.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

Well, until changes are made to the code of the site, you might want to
check out Firefox. It might help you deal with the load times
until Leperous gets around to responding to your suggestion.

Addicted to Morphine said:
Well, until changes are made to the code of the site, you might want to check out Firefox. It might help you deal with the load times until Leperous gets around to responding to your suggestion.

See, this is a positive reply. I do not respond well to projected negativity very well.

I was not opposed to switching browsers. I did however ask if it would really solve my problem? I do not want to be placed in a position to where I am unaware that something is going on because an image is removed. Will it replace it with something identifiable as "Image removed here"

Seems to me that Crono was convinced that a simple browser switch was a cure to all my woes without even bothering to substantiate it with "Yes, I tried it and it seems to fit your need Underdog"

Hell, the last time I asked him for a spell checker for firefox I cam out of it with a bad taste in my mouth and I switched back to IE. At least it was familiar. I am not saying that he was wrong. There probably is a spell checker but I was either to stupid to locate it or worse, I was just to stupid.

Anyway, I am tired of others projecting their negativity upon me because something I said didn't fit their viewpoint.

I would have rather read, "Good suggestion Underdog but, until Leperus reappears we all need to just understand that some people just don't care if you have issues."

I would have not liked the notion, but at least I would have been aware that someone had a bit of sympathy. Even if sympathy was all there was in the end.

If firefox will fit my needs, and someone can help me adjust it, problem solved.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.

I just deselected the "Load Images" option and the Recently Watched thread loaded much faster.

Under Options go to Web Features and it's right there. See? (31kb) http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/88/ffoption2up.jpg

Here's what the recently watched thread looks like without images (170kb): http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/552/rw3pl.jpg

CNN.com was really confusing without images, but the Snarkpit looked
fine. And I think what you should do is just use FF with images
disabled to browse the Snarkpit (and other slow loading sites you
frequent), and use IE for all your other low-intensity browsing needs.

Also, if you Tick "for the originating web site only" then no images
posted in the forum itself will be loaded. Which may be all you
need. For example, the ^_^ thread becomes much less offensive.

Might I ask, why do you have a side scroll?

OK, I will check. Perhaps now I can look at the maps forum again.

[edit] editing seems a bit
harder now but I think this may serve. Images are gone but there is an
icon that shows where one used to be. I wonder, what an outside link
looks like.

Thanks a bunch.

[edit2] Sadly, even if I want to see an image I cannot with them turned off. Even if I click a link.

I hope Leperus can impliment some compromise.

Thanks again, the site is much faster now.

---

There is no history until something happens, then there is.