Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 27, 2024, 9:22 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
#11
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 6, 2015 at 10:19 pm)bennyboy Wrote: In the current guy's case, who we can talk about but not name (I know the rules), the guy's a nice guy overall, and making good contributions, and clearly identifies strongly with his color of choice.  I get it-- but after all that, I still feel such a persistent and excessive use of special fonts should be discouraged, ideally with a rule.
I don't understand what the issue is? You've been here over two years and this is the first (I'm assuming) person you've had to ignore because his font color choice bothers you. Suffice it to say, problem solved, no? It's not worth legislating the option out. The only colors a person can't choose are red and green. If they want to take the time out to type out the color tag or always use the full editor, good on them.

(July 6, 2015 at 10:19 pm)bennyboy Wrote: For me, the best solution would be a programming one-- a feature to force all forum text to black, or even to select your preferred font or whatever.  The second best would be people not using goofy fonts because it's pointless and annoying.  The third, I suppose, would be to follow your suggestion for me to fuck off, which language I would have preferred to your patronizing tone.

Are you going to do the programming? Are you going to do the CSS mods so that one poster every two years or so can't use a color that annoys one or two users? Are you going to install/purchase the plugin?

Come on, man. Don't be an asshole because someone pointed out that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Rexbeccarox was being nice about it. I would imagine that's done with, now.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
#12
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 6, 2015 at 10:31 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Are you going to do the programming? Are you going to do the CSS mods so that one poster every two years or so can't use a color that annoys one or two users? Are you going to install/purchase the plugin?
Firs of all, let me say that you shouldn't take this as criticism-- I think this is a great-looking site, and it runs very well. But you can always tweak features to make it run even better for even more people, right? Smile

Are you actually asking me if I'd do these things, or just trying to show that I'm being a prick to suggest that they could be done?  Because I'd actually be willing to help with site features if anyone asked.  Since I can already see that this site runs javascript, then adding a clientside button script to strip user-defined colors would be trivial: just a string search/replace, probably just a couple lines of code.  Making it toggle-able would be slightly more difficult (you'd have to preserve the original strings), as would making it toggle-able on a per-post basis, but would still be pretty simple. And since this site is nicely organized with clear class names, finding the right parts to strip/change should be very easy, especially if you are permitted to use jquery.

I agree with you that this has very rarely been a problem.  And that, to be honest, is why I actually assumed there was ALREADY the no-goofy-fonts rule that I am now asking to be considered. I've now put the person in question on Ignore, and I'm still enjoying using the website. But I still thought it was worth making a thread about, and here we are.
Reply
#13
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 6, 2015 at 10:19 pm)bennyboy Wrote:
(July 6, 2015 at 1:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Benny, like I said in the other thread (and I'm not trying to be mean at all, just honest): if you have problems with flash and funny colors, etc., the internet is probably not the place for you in general. My advice is to ignore a user who doesn't conform to your requirements.

It's not your place to tell me what I should/shouldn't be able to do with my free time.  This is a solvable technical problem, solvable by either site programmers who can easily give better control over how the site displays (I know this for a fact as I'm personally capable of doing it), or the person who insists on using strangely-colored fonts, or by me-- since I found the "Ignore" button which you bothered to tell me how to find in that "other" thread.

In the current guy's case, who we can talk about but not name (I know the rules), the guy's a nice guy overall, and making good contributions, and clearly identifies strongly with his color of choice.  I get it-- but after all that, I still feel such a persistent and excessive use of special fonts should be discouraged, ideally with a rule.

For me, the best solution would be a programming one-- a feature to force all forum text to black, or even to select your preferred font or whatever.  The second best would be people not using goofy fonts because it's pointless and annoying.  The third, I suppose, would be to follow your suggestion for me to fuck off, which language I would have preferred to your patronizing tone.

Wow. "Fuck off" wasn't even close to what I meant; I thought I was pretty nice about it, but now... well, you can go ahead and take your own suggestion.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Reply
#14
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 7, 2015 at 12:31 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: Wow. "Fuck off" wasn't even close to what I meant; I thought I was pretty nice about it, but now... well, you can go ahead and take your own suggestion.
The hell it's not what you meant. Just because you found passive-aggressive wording for it doesn't mean you weren't giving me a clear message that I should shut up or get out of Dodge. I post several posts a day here, and you are saying that this is probably not the place for me. Do you not see the insensitivity in saying that?

And who says that I'm only making this post just for myself? As far as I know, I'm a member of a community here, and in reasonably good standing. Since I was already thinking about formatting and visual/neurological issues, it occurred to me that many people in the world are epileptic, and I thought I'd mention that as an issue that might not have been considered yet. You don't think it's important to make the site friendly for epileptics? Okay, that's fine, it's definitely a minority group. But consider this: 1% of people are epileptic right now, 4% will develop some form of epilepsy in their lives, 10% of Americans will have at least one epileptic seizure at least once in their lives, and this forum has. . . how many members? You do the math.

But even if I'm a minority of one, and everyone's fine with walls of special fonts, all-caps and red-blue strobing gifs, I don't see that putting in my two cents should result in you telling me the "internet's not the place for you." It is, in fact, probably the only place for me.
Reply
#15
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 7, 2015 at 1:09 am)bennyboy Wrote:
(July 7, 2015 at 12:31 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: Wow. "Fuck off" wasn't even close to what I meant; I thought I was pretty nice about it, but now... well, you can go ahead and take your own suggestion.
The hell it's not what you meant.  Just because you found passive-aggressive wording for it doesn't mean you weren't giving me a clear message that I should shut up or get out of Dodge.

Don't ever presume to tell me what I actually meant; especially after I've told you otherwise.  I was not giving you anything of the sort, and your projection doesn't make it so.  I don't know what your problem is, but you are way out of line here.

Quote:I post several posts a day here, and you are saying that this is probably not the place for me.  Do you not see the insensitivity in saying that?

I'm sorry; when was I ever tasked with being sensitive? I didn't say this is not the place for you; if you like it here, I of course want you to stay.  What I said is that the internet is probably not for you if one little pink post is too much for you to handle, and you require an entire forum to change their rules because of something you could almost literally encounter anywhere online.

Quote:And who says that I'm only making this post just for myself?  As far as I know, I'm a member of a community here, and in reasonably good standing.  Since I was already thinking about formatting and visual/neurological issues, it occurred to me that many people in the world are epileptic, and I thought I'd mention that as an issue that might not have been considered yet.  You don't think the site should be made friendly for epileptics?  Okay, that's fine, but consider this: 1% of people are epileptic right now, 4% will develop some form of epilepsy in their lives, and this forum probably has more than 100 members.

But, Benny, you're the only one really complaining here.  Font/color rules have never been a thing here, at least in the almost three years I've been here. Why should staff be tasked with more rules to enforce that would apply to so little activity on the forum and that only seem to affect one person?  

Quote:But even if I'm a minority of one, and everyone's fine with walls of special fonts and re-blue strobing gifs, I don't see that putting in my two cents should result in you telling me the "internet's not the place for you."  It is, in fact, probably the only place for me.

That's great.  You need to come to terms with the internet, then. Again, that's not meant to be mean, rather, it's the nature of things online.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Reply
#16
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
Benny, I think I have a workaround just for you.
Well, it's just a suggestion, given how you say you could do the code for it.
Install the grease monkey plug-in (it exists for Firefox and maybe for chrome). Create a script that searches for the font/color tag and check if it's red or green. If not, then replace the color with black.

Concerning gifs, I don't think there's a way to check for epilepsy inducing animations, given that the forum software probably handles all images the same. I believe the UCP lets you disable all images...

I'd say there are more people out there who are color blind, than epileptic... And yet...admins use red, mods use green.
Maybe we should consider a change in those colors.
Reply
#17
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 7, 2015 at 1:09 am)bennyboy Wrote: But even if I'm a minority of one, and everyone's fine with walls of special fonts, all-caps and red-blue strobing gifs, I don't see that putting in my two cents should result in you telling me the "internet's not the place for you."  It is, in fact, probably the only place for me.

To be fair benny, I don't think she meant it like that. I think she's more just saying what I was earlier about it being a bit naive to expect the forum to change for the very few who happen to have epilepsy. Like, it would be nice if the forum wasn't a trigger for shit like that, but if it were to change I think it would probably be to the detriment of everyone else's experience.

I don't think anyone was scolding you for giving your 2 cents.
Reply
#18
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
I propose all srs bsnss be written in rainbow
Reply
#19
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 7, 2015 at 1:25 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: But, Benny, you're the only one really complaining here.  Font/color rules have never been a thing here, at least in the almost three years I've been here. Why should staff be tasked with more rules to enforce that would apply to so little activity on the forum and that only seem to affect one person?  

I would disagree with this to some extent. Gopping awful fonts and colours have absolutely been discouraged by staff before. Maybe there aren't any actual rules about it, but it has been warned about before.
Reply
#20
RE: 1. formatting; 2. choice of subsection
(July 7, 2015 at 4:00 am)Napoléon Wrote:
(July 7, 2015 at 1:25 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: But, Benny, you're the only one really complaining here.  Font/color rules have never been a thing here, at least in the almost three years I've been here. Why should staff be tasked with more rules to enforce that would apply to so little activity on the forum and that only seem to affect one person?  

I would disagree with this to some extent. Gopping awful fonts and colours have absolutely been discouraged by staff before. Maybe there aren't any actual rules about it, but it has been warned about before.

That's cool. I was only coming from the standpoint that it hasn't been an issue until now during my time here, or maybe as staff and I just didn't notice it as a regular member. Regardless, when only one person actually has a problem, it seems silly to add more rules to a forum that prides itself for being open. Some people find it annoying, sure, but that's why we have the ignore feature, and it's not like a crap-ton of members use silly fonts or colors, present company excluded Tongue
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Compulsory swearing subsection suggestion I_am_not_mafia 47 6304 May 13, 2018 at 3:21 pm
Last Post: The Valkyrie
  Civility subsection suggestion Catholic_Lady 400 46451 May 11, 2018 at 10:36 am
Last Post: Tiberius
  New forum subsection idea - Family & Parenting? Angrboda 15 3181 January 21, 2014 at 12:09 am
Last Post: c172



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)