massive threads and avatars (and bums and willies)

[Ulysses]

Why aren't long threads being split into pages anymore? And what happened to the limit on avatar dimensions?

Turning off avatars through the control panel is simple, but I'm not sure if there's anything I can do about the long threads. It's getting pretty annoying to have bend my right wrist at unnatural angles in order to scroll down two or three posts.

 

[Claverhouse]

Go to your CP.

Select Edit Options.

>Thread Display Options > Number of Posts to Show Per Page

Choose from 20/30/40/80/100.


It's even more annoying to have to open a dozen pages just to see one thread, like one of those damn magazine lists where each sentence is on a separate --- each loaded with heavy advertising junk --- page. We no longer live in the Browser Dark Ages.




Claverhouse


EDIT: Avatars are at the discretion of the avataree.

 

[Ulysses]

It's even more annoying to have to open a dozen pages just to see one thread, like one of those damn magazine lists where each sentence is on a separate --- each loaded with heavy advertising junk --- page. We no longer live in the Browser Dark Ages.

Each to his own. I think I'll stick with 40 posts per page until I find an easier way of scrolling through long threads.

Thanks.

 

[sagewolf]

So it rose above 40, finally? That's wonderful. I like just opening a thread and having it there.

How long ago did this happen without me noticing?

 

[Ulysses]

It must have happened sometime after the update. That's when I started noticing how bloated INTP Forum's vBulletin had become.

 

[Claverhouse]

No, it was a deliberate decision. It was set to a moderate 50 posts per page to accommodate a balance between those wishing to read a civilized 100 posts per page and those who wish to read on their cell-phones.



:smiley_emoticons_mr



Claverhouse

 

[Ulysses]

You call it civilized, and I call it inefficient and unnecessary.

 

[Cegorach]

Personally, I prefer to stick with a smaller number such as twenty, it works with organization of memory where one may break things down into sections and recognize them based on positioning from beginning of page to end.

(i.e Imagine trying to memorize a sequence of two thousand words... broken down into smaller sections and memorized individually, attached together as you become confident of their place in your mind; it becomes far less daunting.)



However, Claverhouse has a point.
It can be modified at the users discretion and larger numbers are more convenient for casual browsing.
It's wholly unreasonable to expect everybody to be compulsive in their need to have threads pre-configured and compartmentalized as many have no desire for organization in this sense.

 

[Claverhouse]

Larger / fewer pages decreases server requests which means the site runs better. This is one of the factors that has improved stability since the move despite many more registrations.




Claverhouse

 

[Ulysses]

Larger / fewer pages decreases server requests which means the site runs better.

No it doesn't. The site's performance depends entirely on the server's load and bandwidth. Requests don't usually have any significant impact on that.

Keep in mind that the majority of visitors don't read threads in their entirety, and those who do might revisit them later on to refer to a specific post. In both cases, having larger threads will mean wasted bandwidth and inefficient use of the server's resources.