Image limit?

Boudreaux · Post by **Boudreaux** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:05 pm

Is there a limit to the number of images allowed per post? I seem to remember an 8-image limit over at GG, just curious if there's a similar restriction here.

setaside · Post by **setaside** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:13 pm

That's 20.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:14 pm

setaside wrote:

That's 20.

20 More?

~Neal

CeeKay · Post by **CeeKay** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:45 pm

J.D. · Post by **J.D.** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:54 pm

I think this is more than 20.

:

tals · Post by **tals** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:24 pm

Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.

Tals

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:28 pm

tals wrote:Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.

On the old site, the limit was the same. 8 total image tags, whether they were to .gifs, .jpgs, emoticons, or images. Apparently the new software does not have that limit.

~Neal

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:45 pm

The Meal wrote:
tals wrote:Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.
On the old site, the limit was the same. 8 total image tags, whether they were to .gifs, .jpgs, emoticons, or images. Apparently the new software does not have that limit.

~Neal

This is good.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:54 pm

/shudders

What on earth does CSL have in mind?

~N

tals · Post by **tals** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:03 pm

The Meal wrote:
tals wrote:Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.
On the old site, the limit was the same. 8 total image tags, whether they were to .gifs, .jpgs, emoticons, or images. Apparently the new software does not have that limit.

~Neal

Ahhh it all makes sense now - I thought everyone had taken leave of their senses and I was the only nomal one

Maybe a setting in the admin options, I know Ikonboard forums you can set a number of emotions (per row) allowed. Not that a large number of smilies is actually that bad - particularly in the above context

Tals

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:44 pm

The Meal wrote:/shudders

What on earth does CSL have in mind?

~N

Well when I did AAR's on the last board the image limit sorta forced me to cut up my posts and get less images into the story. That kind of stuff. But image padding is good to so........

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:09 pm

J.D. wrote:I think this is more than 20.
[/snip]

You missed a couple.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:10 pm

The Meal wrote:/shudders

What on earth does CSL have in mind?

~N

Probably some other way to tell us all to shut the fuck up.

Napoleon · Post by **Napoleon** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:55 am

I HATED the image limit over at the old board.

Mainly because of the emoticons reason though, as I tend to have lots of emoticons in my longer posts...mainly because I'm hilariously funny. On the other hand, CSL also has a point with his AAR post comment.

I'd vote for a higher amount of images per post. Say, 12? 16?
Of course, people would also have to adhere to the 56K tag (and the almost always accompanying NSFW tag

)

CeeKay · Post by **CeeKay** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 9:11 am

tals wrote:Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.

Tals

emoticons are .gifs too! can't we all just get along!

there's no place like home, there's no place like home.....

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:21 am

Dirt wrote:
The Meal wrote:/shudders

What on earth does CSL have in mind?

~N
Probably some other way to tell us all to shut the fuck up.

Peacedog · Post by **Peacedog** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:37 pm

I'd vote for a higher amount of images per post. Say, 12? 16?

The UBB limit was hard coded. There is no hard coded limit in phpBB. If this were a feature we desired, it'd have to be modded or hacked in, and it would be very low priority. There is no desire for such a feature at this time, however.

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:23 pm

Peacedog wrote:
I'd vote for a higher amount of images per post. Say, 12? 16?
The UBB limit was hard coded. There is no hard coded limit in phpBB. If this were a feature we desired, it'd have to be modded or hacked in, and it would be very low priority. There is no desire for such a feature at this time, however.

Not yet

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:38 pm

/me shudders again

~Neal

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:51 pm

The Meal wrote:/me shudders again

~Neal

MWUAHAHAHAHA

tals · Post by **tals** » Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:40 pm

CeeKay wrote:
tals wrote:Would I be boring if i'm stating the obvious

The poster said images, not emotions.

Tals
emoticons are .gifs too! can't we all just get along!

It was an observation, they are or can be handled differently by the forum software. Meal clarified me why lots of smilies was not actually as weird as it looked

Tals

Napoleon · Post by **Napoleon** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:01 am

Peacedog wrote:
I'd vote for a higher amount of images per post. Say, 12? 16?
The UBB limit was hard coded. There is no hard coded limit in phpBB. If this were a feature we desired, it'd have to be modded or hacked in, and it would be very low priority. There is no desire for such a feature at this time, however.

Allright. I was under the impression from Meal's post that there might be a hardcoded limit in this forum software.

If there isn't, I agree...who cares

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:21 pm

Napoleon wrote:
Peacedog wrote:
I'd vote for a higher amount of images per post. Say, 12? 16?
The UBB limit was hard coded. There is no hard coded limit in phpBB. If this were a feature we desired, it'd have to be modded or hacked in, and it would be very low priority. There is no desire for such a feature at this time, however.
Allright. I was under the impression from Meal's post that there might be a hardcoded limit in this forum software.

If there isn't, I agree...who cares

Noone suspects a thing

MWUAHAHAHA

Kael · Post by **Kael** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:29 pm

I win.

ChaoZ · Post by **ChaoZ** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:20 pm

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:42 pm

ChaoZ wrote: +

Foul. The picture is not the same.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:42 pm

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:46 pm

Wrong shade of yellow. Doesn't count.

~Neal

ChaoZ · Post by **ChaoZ** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 3:01 pm

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:39 pm

You know, I'd suggest that y'all need to find something better to do with your time, but my 360+ posts would make that rather hypocritical.

Oh, what the heck: y'all need to find something better to do with your time.

- Ash

Eel Snave · Post by **Eel Snave** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 6:11 pm

Yeah, how DO you get the time to post so much here? I've tried to keep up with you guys, but there's no way.

Asharak · Post by **Asharak** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 6:18 pm

Eel Snave wrote:Yeah, how DO you get the time to post so much here? I've tried to keep up with you guys, but there's no way.

Really fast typing of really short posts. Plus, stopping by here is usually the first thing I do when I get off work. Things like the news and supper are lesser priorities.

- Ash