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

    • Eh? That wasn't "my quote"! If you look at your post above,it is clearly a quote by Rockets! None of us have any  idea what a Corbyn led government during Covid would have been like. But do you seriously think it would have been worse than Johnson's self-serving performance? What you say about the swing of seats away from Labour in 2019 is true. But you have missed my point completely. The fact that Labour under Corbyn got more than ten million votes does not mean that Corbyn was "unelectable", does it? The present electoral system is bonkers, which is why a change is apparently on the cards. Anyway, it is pointless discussing this, because we are going round in circles. As for McCluskey, whatever the truth of that report, I can't see what it has to do with Corbyn?
    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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