Rule Change Vote/Request - 20 Thumbnails per post.

I think we should change this rule to something more lenient.

I understand that the 20 thumbnails per post rule was implemented to save on bandwidth and for layout issues.

The problem is, that bandwidth saving issue was probably great for 2005, when half our members were on dial-up connections and what have you, but in today's era of ubiquitous high-speed connections, multiple-megabyte gifs in every other post, and streaming video and the like, it seems pointless.

As an example, here is my Maria Menunous thread: http://whatboyswant.com/forum_read/5262271/2/20/Maria_Menounos_thread_yea_this_is_happening.html

Posts 38 and 39 have a combined 5 gifs in them, for a total of something like 25 megabytes. Being worried about more than 20 thumbnails in a post seems...trivial when you look at it in that context.


As far as the layout goes, I don't think that we should be able to post an infinite number of thumbnails in a post, but I also don't think a limit of 20 is appropriate.

What I've done in some of my recent threads is try to keep sets of pictures together, even if that particular set runs over 20 pictures, or if two sets together run a few over, I can still keep them to one post instead of like 3 pictures in one post and then 19 in another or whatever.

So, I've come up with two potential solutions to this:

1. Set max thumbnails in a post to 50, which is the default max setting on ChickUpload

2. Keep the max thumbnails to 20, but don't really enforce it unless it gets crazy, like someone posts 100 or something.


Either way, that allows us to keep most pictures of one set or whatever into one post and avoid post whoring, while still keeping the layout of the site readable.



If you have objections, or other potential options, or think this is the greatest idea since Ice Cream, let us know here.

We shouldn't have rules that we're not going to enforce. That's a dangerous slope.

So the discussion should be over keeping it as it is, and enforcing it properly; or changing the rule to 50, or X, or whatever thumbs.

And I've expressed my opinion on this issue in our PMs. So I'll not share it here, until the other mods weigh in.

FIGHTFIGHTFIGHTKISSKISS!

50 per Post is a good idea ... I've always thought that 20 has been on the small side.

50 sounds fine, right up until we have to go through a post and pick out several pictures to delete because someone can't follow the other rules we have, it gets kind of tedious going through all those codes, not that it's not doable, just a bit of a pain in the ass.

I understand where you're coming from EL, you post a lot of "sets" of pictures that are of good quality and follow the rules, the problems arise with the other knuckleheads on the site that can't seem to follow the rules, even one so simple as counting to 20

Now I wouldn't be against raising the limit of thumbs to 25, but 50 just sounds like way to many codes to sort through to pick out one, or several bad pictures posted by knuckleheads...

That's my 2 cents for what it's worth

Or you could just nuke the whole post if there are multiple rule violations in it.

Since trying to pull actual data on connection rates of our userbase, a technical undertaking on the Dutchies part, why not create a poll? Based on the poll we can see if it is a good idea or not. The current poll has already an established winner.

Q: How fast is your connection?
1. Dial-up (<56Kb/s)
2. Satellite (<256kb/s) [separate option since Satellite sucks at latency and multiple https calls will kill it quick.]
3. Broadband (<512Kb/s)
4. Broadband (<1Mb/s)
5. Broadband (<3Mb/s)
6. Broadband (<6Mb/s)
7. Broadband (>6Mb/s)

Quote:

Originally posted by DEMO

50 sounds fine, right up until we have to go through a post and pick out several pictures to delete because someone can't follow the other rules we have, it gets kind of tedious going through all those codes, not that it's not doable, just a bit of a pain in the ass.

I understand where you're coming from EL, you post a lot of "sets" of pictures that are of good quality and follow the rules, the problems arise with the other knuckleheads on the site that can't seem to follow the rules, even one so simple as counting to 20

Now I wouldn't be against raising the limit of thumbs to 25, but 50 just sounds like way to many codes to sort through to pick out one, or several bad pictures posted by knuckleheads...

That's my 2 cents for what it's worth

A couple other options (instead of just nuking the post):

1. look at the URL ending for the offending picture and then do a "Ctrl+F" search for that ending when you edit the post

2. Make a note in the rule change that the max number of thumbnails is 40 or 50 or whatever, but that anything over 20 will not be modded, so if there is an offending picture, the post will be deleted in its entirety. That way you're covered either way, and it gives the poster the option.




Also, someone should make that poll. I'm kinda curious to see what kind of connections people are on. Is one of those "mobile" or do we just assume people know what their 4G/LTE speeds are?

At first I was thinking the 2nd idea was the best ("2. Keep the max thumbnails to 20, but don't really enforce it unless it gets crazy, like someone posts 100 or something." ) but the problem would be to define "getting crazy" and could end up with someone being modded for posting 54 pics in a row, while someone else posts 52 and gets nothing. Not to mention different mods having different opinions on that limit.

So as Bangle said, I guess things have to be clear.
I think though that 50 is a bit too much. Yes we have better connections and server-side bandwidth is less and less a problem nowadays but it still have a tendency to overload the page and make browsing worse (lots of scrolling involved). Also, there is the modding issue that Demo mentioned.

Something like 30 or 40 would be better imo.

25 Per Post Maximum, Trying to edit the codes on more than that would be a bloody pain.

50 pics per post maximum. Rules re-written so that it is EXTEMELY clear that posts over 50 pics will not be modded, and will be deleted. AND THE MOST IMPORTATNT PART OF THE EQUATION - Notice given to the OP of why the post was deleted. Posters can not be expected to learn if we don't tell them what they did wrong.

Thats my vote.

I like 20 because it's an easy count whether there are 4 per line or 5 per line.

25 becomes visually obtrusive unless there are 5 thumbs per line.

I don't really care, aside from the ease of modding, so sticking to 20 is just fine and dandy with me, I don't see the benefit of upping it 5 pics.

What I can say is that a couple of the offending threads in FB, where there are a gazzillion thumbs, full size, and gifs, loaded very slowly on my machine at home. It's a PIA to mod.

Same goes for Azbo's gif threads. Some of those pages with 30 gifs per page take a little while too. I'm on a DSL with a wifi router, and there often multipler users at my home. For the rare person that's still on dial up, even the current rules allow for some pages that will take a L O N G time to load.

My vote, leave it as it is.

I don't mod these, but 20 makes sense.

I gotta side with my good friend, Richard Nixon Eric Lindrosse and say I think 50 max is a pretty solid deal. Even I have highspeed now, as far as that part of it goes. As for mods goin "hey, fuck you, you handsome little sexy, tight ab'd well hung and obviously awesome person" you can calm right down Demo, also, kinda gay bro, since wouldn't this also save some mod work, not having to immediately edit like half of new threads for the max thumbnail thing? Anywho, I believe raising the limit is a good idea, and people like change. It's why people cheat all the time.

Also, Erik Longdros ... Is a cool guy, I've heard he smells fantastic.

<----- Still happy with maximum of 25.....Please don't go to 50 per post

Vote Count:

EL - 50
Honda - 50
SP - 50
BWT - 50
Punnani - 25 - too hard to mod more (voted twice, but that doesn't count )
Bust - 20 - too hard to mod more, prefers multiples of 4 and 5(?)
omuh - 30-40
Demo - 25, too hard to mod more
Kanzen - No vote
Bangs - No vote
Others - ?


That makes 4 votes for 50, 1 for 30-40, 2 for 25 and one for 20. Fifty has the plurality, but there are some concerns.

So, let me propose a compromise to a kind of middle ground:


NEW PROPOSAL:

We change the maximum number of thumbnails to 40, with a note stating that posts with more than 20 thumbnails will not have their posts edited to comply with the rules.

If you post 20 thumbs and one or two are bad, the mods will fix that.
If you post >20 thumbs and one or two are against the rules, the post gets deleted.


I think this addresses both the concerns that posts >25 are too hard to moderate (since you dont have to edit any code once they get that big), and that the current limit is too low for today's internet users. 40 is also divisible by both 4 and 5, so Bust's layout/counting concerns would also be allayed.

Works for me, but that is gonna be some huge pages.

I said things. I stand by them.

EL's compromise seems pretty solid.

I vote for the image minimum being 550 images. Any posts that does not contain that many will be deleted on the spot and the user banned.