Corona | Coming Attractions

Well?

All queries have been forwarded to Godot and will be addressed in due time.

The issue with having images enabled is that some users will abuse the privledge and have huge-ass pictures. I know that I can limit the size but I haven't really looked yet into what a decent size a picture/image file should be. Any suggestions?

Anything larger than 640x480 is likely to stretch out the board box to an unwieldy width.

I just checked the size of this comment field, and it appear to be around 590 pixels wide. The gray word balloons where our comments appear are 610 pixels wide (meaning, obviously, that there is a ten pixel border on either side). If you wanted to be certain that no stretching occurred, then, you'd want to keep it so that no image was wider than 590 pixels.

Maybe you could set it so that only images posted to a certain image host were visible. There are a number of sites (like Photobucket) that automatically resize an image if the file size is too large. Of course, this depends more on how much information is required to display the image than how big it is, initially. A black-and-white image saved at a low resolution could be quite a screenhog, theoretically. Still, though, it would have the effect of making a majority of the images posted sized down if they were too large in their original states.

When I quote someone's post that person's text in their post doesn't show up for me. Case in point, this post which is a reply to Goiter's. Believe it or not, I can only access the message forums using the admin screen, which is a pain in the ass and there seems to be things that regular posters can do that I can't. More stuff for the developers to fix, but it's all minor stuff.

Also, can anyone else confirm that links in your signature are not hyperlinked (like Goiters' TinyURL one?)

Thanks for the info on image sizes Goiter, I'll take it to the HTML elves and get them to figure out a solution.

I can confirm that my signature link is not a hyperlink--at least on Firefox and Opera. I haven't tried it on IE or Safari, yet. I didn't realize it was meant to be a hyperlink. I was just trying to make some money on a shirt. Is it all right to plug my wares on the site? If it is not, I will change my signature to something un-pluggy.

You could always create a standard user account until the kinks in your admin account get straightened out. I recommend "The Eye of Sauriol." Your avatar would be a hue-altered screen grab of Jackson's Eye of Barad-dûr--with a maple leaf for a pupil, natch. I suppose you could put the Corona symbol in the maple leaf's lieu, but the maple leaf would be a sight funnier to all us folk what find your nationality to be somewhat novel.

(If I had a life, I would not have bothered to mock up the following:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/smurfthumper/eyesauriol2.jpg)

Doing so might have the unfortunate side effect of leading people to believe you are a champion of the Jackson version of Lord of the Rings. (It has come to my attention that we're all supposed to be above such crowd-pleasing drivel.) I'd do it, but that's me. "Comedy before dignity!" has always been my motto. Well, that and, "Not on the face!"

Goiter, your signature URL is hyperlinked when I see your post from the admin section. What's also weird is that I noticed McCracken's sig is hyperlinked and works. Check out one of his posts near the bottom of this thread: http://coronacomingattractions.com/reporting-bugs-and-other-strange-thin...

Before I drop this as a bug with the developers, can you take another look at the signature part of your user ID page? If McCracken's sig is hyperlinked you should be able to also do the same to yours.

I thought about making another ID for the forums but I decided against it. I figure that eventually this will get fixed in future updates. It's a minor issue for me and I can live with it right now.

Hmm. Well, I went to my profile page and added html tags to the link. It appears to have worked. I imagine McCracken just did that to begin with.

Looks like image tagging works, after all--as long as you do it in html.

I'm able to see it on my computer, anyway. Can anyone else confirm being able to see it?

I see it.

It sees me!!

see what Goiter? LOL!

Yer ain't be jes funnin' me, is ye?

So are we cool with the way image tags are used on the forums or is there more that needs to be done?

I'm cool with it. (I speak for everyone, naturally.) Some folks may want to look into how html coding is done--though I'm assuming most of us have been punishing the Internet with our presence long enough to have a fair handle on it.