We are currently experiencing payment processing issues. Our team is working to resolve the problem as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience

Forums
Feedback, Suggestions, and Support

Post Reply

[Suggestions] Rule extensions, emoticon options

THE ECONOMY · 2009-10-31T17:15:31-01:00

MESSRS., may it please you to hear the following most humble MOTION to put in place the proposals listed below, for the greater good of all. 1.) NEW RULE: Tags in nosebleed thread titles. I propose the introduction of a new rule, which obliges users to use tags in nosebleed threads indicating "out of the norm" content, or (perhaps better yet) simply denoting the nature of the content in the thread. This might well take the following form: Spoiler:[loli] maids! [yuri] hot pics! [het] kissing! This would allow users to circumnavigate content which is either not to their tastes, or blatantly illegal in their nation of residence, whilst still having the opportunity to enjoy the nosebleed section. The crux of this matter was briefly mentioned once in the Rules! thread by the Hon. Member doswillrule Spoiler:doswillrule wrote...Yeah, please make it obvious in the title. It doesn't bother me, but I can't say the same for my damned government and police force. but never discussed at length afterwards. I am well aware that this might be intentional, as our Laird Jacob has opined on the issue of potentially problematic content that he'd want people to be discreet about such content, thus possibly making the proposed tagging system too blatant to be implemented. I humbly thought it not unwise to bring up the matter in this form, so that it may be settled properly. 3.) NEW TECH: Emoticon options. I propose the introduction of two separate, but related features: One, the option to disable display of graphical emoticons, preferably via the user profile, across the entire BBS. Two, the option to disable emoticons, preferably via a checkbox below the post form, for the next post one is about to make. On one hand it would make for a not insignificant elevation of comfort, on the other it would eliminate much hair-pulling when the emoticon parser collides with, say, lists. (A:, B:, C:, D:) In closing, I am well aware that the Hon. Members of the Staff have more pressing matters on their hands; however, the implementation of two of the aforementioned suggestions would require little effort from the staff once such conventions as discussed above could be agreed upon. Furthermore, I consulted with staff before putting this proposal up for discussion to ensure it not being insolent, and received a go-ahead from Matt, Esq. Many thanks!

Pages 12

Hoshi

16 years ago

Rbz wrote...

gibbous wrote...

and enable people like me to browse the forums without disabling signatures altogether.
I furthermore propose these dimensions to be the old Internet standard for signatures, 55 (H) by 400 (W) pixels:

I reject your dimension proposal and propose my own:

245 (H) by 605 (W)

I prefer RBZ size on sigs. but overall I'm happy with the amount thats provided to us.

I agree on the third rule though! :3

Forums
Feedback, Suggestions, and Support

Post Reply

Pages 12