Why doesn't Anandtech Forums make their forums more like Protege5.com? A fourm with active HTML for posts and signature

[WayneTeK]

sites like PROTEGe5.com have their posts/signatures enabled so that you can input HTML or pictures within posts or have signatures so that you can have pictures for signatures or etc...

My question is why isn't Anandtech like this? Is it because they are trying to save costs?

 

[Paulson]

well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

 

[WayneTeK]

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

well, that could be moderated as well though, can't it?

 

[dighn]

fvck no. the long sigs on here are already annoying. i wouldn't want a mess like this: Text

anyway I doubt it's a cost issue. images could be linked from offsite and wouldn't add traffic to at itself. the probable reason is that html/image is easy to abuse.

 

[MrCodeDude]

Originally posted by: WayneTeK

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

well, that could be moderated as well though, can't it?

I'll put it this way. I post goatse in a thread. With HTML and what not, you click on the thread, you see Goatse. With what we have now, you have a link to Goatse.

Would you rather see Goatse or have a link to it that you can easily mouse-over and see it's Goatse?
-- mrcodedude

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: MrCodeDude

Originally posted by: WayneTeK

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

well, that could be moderated as well though, can't it?

I'll put it this way. I post goatse in a thread. With HTML and what not, you click on the thread, you see Goatse. With what we have now, you have a link to Goatse.

Would you rather see Goatse or have a link to it that you can easily mouse-over and see it's Goatse?
-- mrcodedude

Worse - with HTML, you load an exploit script and get W32.Blaster@Goat.se, which sets your desktop, screensaver, all .jpg files, to the aforementioned nastiness, and then emails itself to everyone in your address book with "Look at this new digital pic of me!"

- M4H

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: dighn
fvck no. the long sigs on here are already annoying. i wouldn't want a mess like this: Text

anyway I doubt it's a cost issue. images could be linked from offsite and wouldn't add traffic to at itself. the probable reason is that html/image is easy to abuse.

lol i agree...


i like AT because it's a simple forum w/ interesting dudes....w/ umm..interesting topics..yeah...umm yeah..hehe

 

[dighn]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: MrCodeDude

Originally posted by: WayneTeK

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

well, that could be moderated as well though, can't it?

I'll put it this way. I post goatse in a thread. With HTML and what not, you click on the thread, you see Goatse. With what we have now, you have a link to Goatse.

Would you rather see Goatse or have a link to it that you can easily mouse-over and see it's Goatse?
-- mrcodedude

Worse - with HTML, you load an exploit script and get W32.Blaster@Goat.se, which sets your desktop, screensaver, all .jpg files, to the aforementioned nastiness, and then emails itself to everyone in your address book with "Look at this new digital pic of me!"

- M4H

 

[silent tone]

Fusetalk is one of the sleeker forum packages, giving users the ability to insert any HTML would get abused. It's so annoying going to other sites finding those people with massive signatures, 5 custom animated smilies, and gaudy avatars. These are the same people that put asinine ringtones on their cell phones and crank the ring volume.

Don't go by me though. I hate people in general.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: dighn

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: MrCodeDude

Originally posted by: WayneTeK

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

well, that could be moderated as well though, can't it?

I'll put it this way. I post goatse in a thread. With HTML and what not, you click on the thread, you see Goatse. With what we have now, you have a link to Goatse.

Would you rather see Goatse or have a link to it that you can easily mouse-over and see it's Goatse?
-- mrcodedude

Worse - with HTML, you load an exploit script and get W32.Blaster@Goat.se, which sets your desktop, screensaver, all .jpg files, to the aforementioned nastiness, and then emails itself to everyone in your address book with "Look at this new digital pic of me!"

- M4H

And it logs you out of AT, your password is reset to an MD5 hash of random characters, and your sig becomes simply:

Owned.

- M4H

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: Paulson
well for one thing... there would be tons of images that would have to load each time you went into a page... with this many users, the forums would slow down (because images have to load individually and what not)

Also, with this many people, there's bound to be ones who will use it to put inappropriate content in their signature... it's just not an option really...

The forums themselves would not slow down. The images and such would not be located on AT Forum servers.. (they could be, but that would be stupid from the admin point). It would only slow down individual clients when they have to download 20-100 signatures with images via their 56k modem. But they could also offer a feature like most other forums do, which is allow the clients to turn off signatures if they like.

I'd love it if AT at least increased the charater length in signatures. Mine is nice and compact right now, but I'd like to have another link in there. I cant even make current text a link because I'd go over my charater limit :disgust:

Im sure with some kind of coding they could also limit the vertical size of a signature, so if they did increase the character limit, people wouldnt be able to create massivly vertical sigs.

 

[Nohr]

The mods have their hands full as it is without having to worry about inappropriate pics.

 

[digitalsm]

Not going to happen. They use to allow pictures and html a long long time ago if I recall correctly but they did away with it do to the massive abuse. Or maybe that was the AGN forum, but Im pretty sure it was this one.

 

[mjquilly]

My question is why isn't Anandtech like this?

Cause forums like that are annoying as hell. 5 minutes to fully load a thread w/ 2 seconds of content.

 

[Czar]

because people would fill their sigs with big anoying pictures along with stupid little gif animations, flashy colors and just basicly the blink tag combined with neon green all over again, horrible idea

 

[rival]

theres no point, who the fvk cares what someones sig says or looks like

 

[KenGr]

You really don't want this to happen. I frequent another forum that allows pics in sigs. Most threads are 75% sigs. Some are good but most you'd never look at. There is a limit of 50k on sigs but there is no way to enforce it. When I and few others started suggesting the 100k to 200k sigs be toned down, we got royally flamed.

 

[idNut]

I think it'd be messy but I do think it would be a nice feature to be able to upload images to the forums instead of having to find your own hosting.

 

[Zugzwang152]

Originally posted by: idNut
I think it'd be messy but I do think it would be a nice feature to be able to upload images to the forums instead of having to find your own hosting.

no way. that's way more bandwidth than AT can afford, and there are plenty of pic hosting sites available, at faster speeds than AT usually.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: istallion
Fusetalk is one of the sleeker forum packages, giving users the ability to insert any HTML would get abused. It's so annoying going to other sites finding those people with massive signatures, 5 custom animated smilies, and gaudy avatars. These are the same people that put asinine ringtones on their cell phones and crank the ring volume.

Don't go by me though. I hate people in general.

i agree in every single aspect.

 

[dman]

They left it open (by accident I think) on an upgrade (maybe a year ago now) and a few threads were started with pics inserted. Pretty tame, but, I guess it was turned back off as a matter of policy. If you like that stuff, your free to surf elsewhere. I like it when it's tasteful, but, most folks do abuse it...

Imagine NEF's with huge images attached to their posts, 50 times in a thread, makes it that much harder to read anything of value.

Anyway, I can certainly understand why it's not in use here.

 

[RossMAN]

I like it just the way it is.

 

[FrogDog]

It baffles me whenever someone says that they'd like to be able to post images to a thread. Forums that allow that are so annoying to read through.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

Because Protege5 doesn't have 1/50th the amount of traffic and/or users that AT does.

 

[RossMAN]

Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello
Because Protege5 doesn't have 1/50th the amount of traffic and/or users that AT does.

Probably more like 1/500th