LegendBegins

Mahz's Dev Journal

In my opinion, an optional rating system is definitely not a big change. To me, a big change is something that would radically change the forum, and/or couldn't possibly be ignored. Ratings don't really change anything, and someone can simply not use them if they prefer not to. I do agree with putting a poll up for larger, potentially controversial features, though.

@TheMaster99

I respectfully disagree. A ratings system is a modification to our social structure, and in my opinion that would be a big change. I for one, don't feel the need for it. That was the biggest turn off for me regarding other sites, I don't feel the need to compete for a ratings system, or trophies, or badges of honor, etc., to represent my public approval. I also don't feel that more than the opinions of a select few are being taken into consideration. I think the rest of the guild should be asked for feedback through a simple poll, and if the majority of the public wants to see it implemented then I can shutup and be content with things. So I can agree with you on the poll, but the scale of things is really left up to personal opinions. It would be much easier to just say, "Well, it's going to change things 'round these parts,' and throw up a poll.

@Aeonumbra

I'd also have to respectfully disagree with you. Captain Jordan, TheMaster, and I are all here daily, and voice our opinions daily, which is why changes seem to be made that we approve of, but in the end, we generally end up agreeing with Mahz's final decision, which is also what tends to be implemented. It's not that anyone beyond Mahz carries more weight (though programming for the Guild does help), but it's that we rarely receive other opinions or voices here. You have a handful of regulars, and then everyone else tends to remain silent. So please, if anyone would like a change, do speak up. Otherwise, forever hold your peace.

Mahz's Dev Journal

I'm someone ambivalent about the rating system, but it's not as much of a matter as other ordeals. However, if I can make a suggestion, I believe the rating should be in the bottom left, or some other place than take up the entirety of the bottom of the post. It looks a bit unappealing, taking up so much space, when it's only a few characters.

Mahz's Dev Journal

I think it's a well designed system, and agree with all of @Captain Jordan's opinions.

Mahz's Dev Journal

It's like watching two protégés squabble for the favor of their master.

@Hank

Masters fade away, but Legends never die.

It's like watching two protégés squabble for the favor of their master.

@Hank

But I am the one and only master No, I'm just trying to get my point across. I don't see why such a system is worthwhile, and as I pointed out, if he feels it is important he can work on it himself, once his dev environment is set up.

@TheMaster99

It's not a majorly important feature to me. But the only reason I've kept it going this long is because I believe it's simpler and more efficient than you make it out to be.

Could I suggest an "upvote" option?

@Melkor

This is actually something I'm working on!

I'm aware of the fact that you do not. However, is it currently impossible for the server code to accept the image redirection, and then before displaying it, resizes it in the same way it would an uploaded image? It could cause an extra few calculations, but what prevents the server from essentially saying "This linked image is too large, so I'm going to scale it down before displaying it" and output the resized version?

@LegendBegins

Because it's an expensive operation and the resized image needs to be saved somewhere (instead of doing it every time). In other words, it involves implementing precisely the "hard" parts of a direct upload system. Whether the user is sending a request to my server with their image (i.e. file upload) or another server is sending a response with an image (i.e. my server making a request to someone's remote avatar URL), I have to do pretty much the same thing. Though in the time I've spent talking about this system I could've probably implemented it.

@Mahz

Haha, that's how life seems to work. But I suppose I might as well just wait until the full image upload system is complete instead of brainstorming for a "good enough" hack.

Mahz's Dev Journal

No. Right now, you can go to massivewallpaperimages.com and paste the URL of an 8192×4608 image into the Guild's avatar box. Since the guild's code right now is 100% naive and trusting of the client (always a bad idea), every user will have to download that 8192x4608 image. If massivewallpaperimages.com has no-cache headers on their images, then everyone on the guild will have to download your avatar image every time they see it. That's why I depend on people to just follow the rules right now. Now, when I implement a system where users can upload their avatars to the guild and I can process their image, then the guild will resize and downgrade that 8192x4608 image into a 150x85 image. In other words, I will be able to enforce the 150x150 max-size constraint since I control the images. I currently do not control the images.

@Mahz

I'm aware of the fact that you do not. However, is it currently impossible for the server code to accept the image redirection, and then before displaying it, resizes it in the same way it would an uploaded image? It could cause an extra few calculations, but what prevents the server from essentially saying "This linked image is too large, so I'm going to scale it down before displaying it" and output the resized version?

@LegendBegins

That's an awful idea for folks on mobile and limited dataplans, especially considering Mahz's example.

@Captain Jordan

According to my idea, all the data load would be on the server, since nothing more than our current 150X150 pictures would display. Perhaps I'm explaining my intent incorrectly.

@LegendBegins

What's the benefit between implementing this and implementing an image upload system? I'm not sure how fetching from a 3rd party site is going to be any cleaner/safer/less open to abuse than uploading.

@Captain Jordan

It's a system that'll take less time to implement, won't require server space to implement, since images are stored elsewhere, and it makes it easier on users of the current system.

Mahz's Dev Journal

No. Right now, you can go to massivewallpaperimages.com and paste the URL of an 8192×4608 image into the Guild's avatar box. Since the guild's code right now is 100% naive and trusting of the client (always a bad idea), every user will have to download that 8192x4608 image. If massivewallpaperimages.com has no-cache headers on their images, then everyone on the guild will have to download your avatar image every time they see it. That's why I depend on people to just follow the rules right now. Now, when I implement a system where users can upload their avatars to the guild and I can process their image, then the guild will resize and downgrade that 8192x4608 image into a 150x85 image. In other words, I will be able to enforce the 150x150 max-size constraint since I control the images. I currently do not control the images.

@Mahz

I'm aware of the fact that you do not. However, is it currently impossible for the server code to accept the image redirection, and then before displaying it, resizes it in the same way it would an uploaded image? It could cause an extra few calculations, but what prevents the server from essentially saying "This linked image is too large, so I'm going to scale it down before displaying it" and output the resized version?

@LegendBegins

That's an awful idea for folks on mobile and limited dataplans, especially considering Mahz's example.

@Captain Jordan

According to my idea, all the data load would be on the server, since nothing more than our current 150X150 pictures would display. Perhaps I'm explaining my intent incorrectly.

Mahz's Dev Journal

A lot of people like recruiting from both casual and advanced. And a lot of people who fit in advanced don't yet dare go there because of the unfortunate elitism history that section had. Fortunately, not many of the elitists remain. Unfortunately, not nearly enough players remain in advanced. This new IntCk system should help on that. Quick thought... Will the system be able to "remember" the search parameters? Say if someone can't stand RPing in anime settings... Will it be able to remember that and consistently filter those away, or will said filter have to be enabled each time?

@Ellri

1. I think it'd be nice for users to be able to save a set of filters that they are commonly searching for. 2. And the system should remember the state of your current filter across sessions until you clear it (i.e. your current filter is saved to the database). It's this kind of thing that's not hard to implement but makes a system much more pleasant to use.

Oversized avatars can be draining on mobile users and people with slow connections. Just resize your avatar with 2 clicks and be done with it.

@Mahz

But won't that problem still persist when you include the option to upload pictures to the site directly?

@LegendBegins

No. Right now, you can go to massivewallpaperimages.com and paste the URL of an 8192×4608 image into the Guild's avatar box. Since the guild's code right now is 100% naive and trusting of the client (always a bad idea), every user will have to download that 8192x4608 image. If massivewallpaperimages.com has no-cache headers on their images, then everyone on the guild will have to download your avatar image every time they see it. That's why I depend on people to just follow the rules right now. Now, when I implement a system where users can upload their avatars to the guild and I can process their image, then the guild will resize and downgrade that 8192x4608 image into a 150x85 image. In other words, I will be able to enforce the 150x150 max-size constraint since I control the images. I currently do not control the images.

@Mahz

I'm aware of the fact that you do not. However, is it currently impossible for the server code to accept the image redirection, and then before displaying it, resizes it in the same way it would an uploaded image? It could cause an extra few calculations, but what prevents the server from essentially saying "This linked image is too large, so I'm going to scale it down before displaying it" and output the resized version?

Mahz's Dev Journal

But won't that problem still persist when you include the option to upload pictures to the site directly?

@LegendBegins

No, because the images can be resized during the upload process. Since they currently are stored off-site, this is not currently possible hence us having this discussion to begin with EDIT: @Captain Jordan - to my knowledge, it definitely isn't an if. It is merely far too unimportant to worry about at the time being. Significant features, bug-fixes, etc are far more important, thus image uploading won't really be thought about until it needs to be.

@TheMaster99

Though, cycling back to the beginning of the conversation, we have the ability to resize it in the embedding process.

@LegendBegins

If you mean doing it client-side on page load, consider the fact that this would have to be done for every profile picture on the page, and done every single load. It would have a devastating effect on load times. Obviously not something that is desirable.

@TheMaster99

No, that isn't what I'm suggesting.

Mahz's Dev Journal

But won't that problem still persist when you include the option to upload pictures to the site directly?

@LegendBegins

No, because the images can be resized during the upload process. Since they currently are stored off-site, this is not currently possible hence us having this discussion to begin with EDIT: @Captain Jordan - to my knowledge, it definitely isn't an if. It is merely far too unimportant to worry about at the time being. Significant features, bug-fixes, etc are far more important, thus image uploading won't really be thought about until it needs to be.

@TheMaster99

Though, cycling back to the beginning of the conversation, we have the ability to resize it in the embedding process.

Mahz's Dev Journal

Oversized avatars can be draining on mobile users and people with slow connections. Just resize your avatar with 2 clicks and be done with it. Though, on that note, I also need to remember to add a "Hide Avatars?" option for users.

@Mahz

But won't that problem still persist when you include the option to upload pictures to the site directly?