Ask Admin

[stacey-lyn]

A 'sock puppetry' section seems long overdue.

[Gidget]

Chippy Minton Wrote:

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

> Can we have a "hall of fame" section? You could

> populate it with classic threads that have run

> their course and then lock them to allow everyone

> to enjoy them whenever they want.

>

> Start it off with the Begging Bowl thread (why did

> that have to go? that was gold!) along with the

> discussion about puppies being sold and personal

> shopping.

>

> It could also be useful to reference to classic

> subjects e.g. CPZ, M&S/Waitrose etc.

Is this a serious request re the Begging Bowl thread?

[Gidget]

Can posters recommend companies that are not in ED or immediate areas?

Are business allowed to keep 'mentioning' themselves as purveyors of services other posters are asking about. I thought this would fall under the one time mentioning your business, and thereafter you need to have people recommend you.

[Administrator]

Yes, non ED companies can be recommended but the recommender has to be in ED.

No, companies are not allowed to continually advertise themselves.

[david_carnell]

Gidget, seriously, just relax. Whilst I'm sure your continual reporting of messages in the business section is well intentioned, it is driving us all potty. You've already been asked once to only report serious breaches of forum rules and yet you persist in reporting every petty offence you come across. Please, stop it.

[Gidget]

David,

Serious breaches of forum rules seem to be a moot point. Every mod seems to have a different idea.

It is not my intention to drive you potty.

[david_carnell]

Then please, I beg you, stop reporting. For a few weeks. Then see if the Business Section has collapsed into anarchy or continues running pretty well with stuff dealt with in the same way it always has been.

If not, then go back to your keyboard with gusto.

[Gidget]

There was a point last week when it definitely was not running very well at all. It resulted in a thread being taken down but it took a long time for that to happen. Do you know what I am talking about?

[david_carnell]

Yes - we all know what you're talking about and you know it's been dealt with privately between you and Admin so maybe let that one drop, eh.

[Administrator]

Hi Gidget,

The forum was running exceptionally well last week and looking into what you said further and chatting to some of the Admins/Moderators it seems you have reported 322 messages previously and been warned not to report so often. Your constant reporting dilutes the seriousness of any messages that you report so please appreciate that when you are actually reporting a "serious" incident it take a bit longer for the team to address it due to the engrained lethargy from seeing an email entitled "Gidget has reported a message" for the 323rd time.

[Gidget]

I think if you look back into my reporting posts you will find that I only reported one from the end of July until the recent one last week.

[Administrator]

You reported a post yesterday at 13:19.

[Chippy Minton]

When will the 'ignore' facility be back?

[Administrator]

Hi, sorry for the delay. For some reason the ignore facility creates loads of error messages which fill up the forum database and make it crash. If we ever get time we will look into and bring back the ignore feature but I think it maybe related to the ignore module not running on PHP5.3, which means it's not a quick fix.

[renifer7]

Hi,

I wanted to post in the "For sale" section but I read the rules and it says there needs to be a connection to ED(well, obviously). Is it OK If I am in .... Would rather ask first then post and be deleted...

Thanks

[Administrator]

Hmm, Tulse Hill is not in in East Dulwich so I'm afraid you shouldn't really post it.

[ianr]

Did you know that the timestamp on postings (at least, the one I made at 19:14) is five minutes slow.

I'm posting this at 19:17:10

[Sue]

ianr Wrote:

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

> Did you know that the timestamp on postings (at

> least, the one I made at 19:14) is five minutes

> slow.

> I'm posting this at 19:17:10

xxxxxx

ianr, that's a bit like the thread about the 176 running ten minutes late :)

[Huguenot]

No, he's right - the server is running slow. Noticed it the other day.

Very unusual. I'd want to talk with the hosting company.

[KalamityKel]

Does happen from time to time though :)

[Administrator]

The time went wrong on the old server when the clocks went back/forward but then I managed to find out how to set the server clock to update from and external timeserver (like Greenwich's). I haven't set this server's clock to stay up to date from elsewhere yet so I assume it's gradually slipping, let me see what I can do.

posted at 13:28

[Administrator]

13:37 :)

[ianr]

10-4 01:14 and out

[celtspur222]

Hello admin. I am having a problem posting pics in the for sale section. The pics are from my computer but I'm getting a size limit message each time I try to upload. Is there any way I can get around this?

Many thanks

[Huguenot]

Yes, reduce your picture size.

When you upload a 10MB file for a picture of your cat, that's the same thing as taking Admin's breakfast from under his nose, smashing it over his head and putting the pieces in his pocket.

Whilst satisfying, it doesn't induce cooperation.

Here's one, go for 600 width maximum http://www.imageoptimizer.net/Pages/Home.aspx