Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've taken the liberty of setting up a flickr account for everyone to use (and a gmail for that matter)


user: [email protected]

pwd: ForumUser01


forum user


Hopefully people can get the hang of it.

Upload the photo there instead of to a message, click on the share button of the photo and copy the code in the Grab the HTML/BBCode box (you can set the size and everything)


Burden on server lightened, plus photo should never dissappear.



:-)

> click on the share button of the photo and copy the code in the Grab the

> HTML/BBCode box (you can set the size and everything)


[post-smiley ed:] and then a moderator has to waste five minutes to come along and change it to something more reasonable.


Do you really want to encourage the embedding of photographs within threads? It's a pain to consume, and an encouragement to nuisance hot-linking.


[Afterthought 8/11] Isn't this, in proposed form, a non-starter anyway? The Flickr account seems inaccessible to me, presumably because the Flickr username is associated with a single (El Pibe's) Yahoo account. Would Flickr even countenance the creation of an account meant to be accessible by anyone? Even if they did, wouldn't it then be liable to attacks by trollers, spammers, pirates, vandals, porn merchants, the bored, ..., for all of which the nominal account holder would be liable to be held responsible.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> embed, link, whatever.


But you were encouraging embedding, as did Admin in the "How to upload and embed a photo:Guide" sticky thread, and its use has been building up since then. Properly it's perhaps in that thread that I should really be querying the practice. I've nothing against the use of an external image repository to lighten the forum server load; probably a good idea, if Flickr or whoever can tolerate it and it can be managed if necessary.


> Given the recent spat on the CGF thread, I reckon it's sensible.


Is that one of the picture threads? I tend to avoid them if I remember them.


> Plus moderators can always edit the worst offenders


Do they really want the work and worry?


> This forum really does sap one's will to live sometimes, with it's wellspring of negativity.


I do sometimes find avoiding reading the forum at all quite therapeutic, for a number of reasons, but I'll keep quiet rather than risk being accused of negativity, and stick to the current straw.


I just don't see why, in most cases, the polite and helpful provision of a link, such as Dispproving baby photo, isn't preferable to having my screen gratuitously filled with whatever someone thinks I should be viewing, and having my reading of a thread made correpondingly less easy.

as i said, link, embed meh.


The spat was about history man effectively using the forum's servers as a repository of photos of local historical interest and then getting upset that admin was deleting them.


He probably didn't know how to embed, and just supplied the links. The presentation is irrelevant to the problem really.


Sorry to tar you with such an adjective, but I was just trying to provide a dedicated resource to help tackle a real problem - people complaining about their photos being deleted by admin, but not being bothered to actually do anything about it - with a workable solution.


I try to do something and within moments I'm being told it's undesirable.


The word sheesh sprung to mind ;-)

Plus links with "midfuck" in and from a whole host of sites get disabled by work firewalls!! (yeah I suppose some might also do flickr, though so far nowhere i've worked)


and whenever I've seen embeds that break the page then me old mucker mockney resizes them, takes seconds.

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have to wonder who's going to benefit from the Trump tarrifs  Possibly those in tje know who dumped their shares before it happened, banked the cash,  bought shares at rock bottom  and are now waiting for stock that crashed to go up again and make a fortune. But the bigger losers will be Americans who expect industry to move their factories to America, provide jobs and revive the economy, 20 years ago that could have happened but since then most factory jobs can now be done by robots  including warehouse movements, and if a tech company is going to build a new factory they will obviously use robotics and maybe AI to do the work, which means a gluten of goods and no one with the cash to buy them.  America will go into another depression and take the rest of the world with it. Forget the issues Liz Truss and Rachel Reeves combined have caused the economy, the trump tarrifs will make them look like saints by comparison.
    • Perhaps someone who works there owns a Tesla and is keen to promote more sales. After all poor Musk needs all the support he can get right now 😢
    • Well unless you have a different user name  you weren't actually commenting on this at all - i was responding to the posters who had concerns about the wooden planters falling apart.   Do carry on though...
    • Oh never mind. I was just commenting on the horrific traffic jams, pollution and delay of emergency services due to our beloved council blocking side roads.   back to beautiful cherry trees 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...