The board has always been set up to accomodate dial-up and 800x600.
People should just be happy that ezboard doesn't have a system like many boards do of automatically rejecting avatars and/or sigs that are above a certain filesize and dimensions. It makes work for the staff since they don't. ;p
Uh... 17 inch. Anything higher than 800x600 is too tiny and causes my eyes to cry out in pain & my head feel like a hammer's pounding it. Hmm... think I should get a smaller monitor? XD
No, I think you should get a pair of glasses.
No, I think you should get a pair of glasses.
Here's the thing... I do wear glasses...
I think when I switch to a higher res, the CRT causes my brain to slightly melt. I think I should probably should go get a new perscription... or something.
I run at 1280x1024 and I curse my monitor for not natively supporting 1600x1200. Almost nothing is designed to run at less than 1024x768 anymore, and frankly I'd go mad trying to use productivity software on a desktop smaller than 1280. You understand that the whole point of a higher resolution is to be able to have more stuff on-screen at a time, ultimately making your computer more useful.
Maybe you should try 1024 for an extended period. When I first encountered higher resolutions I had trouble with the smaller text, but I got used to it. By the end of the day, there was no going back.
Yeah, smaller text is the reason I stick with 1024x768, despite having the option to go a bit higher.
I'm considering getting a new monitor anyway, this one recently decided "Hey, how about I output everything a little blurry to @#%$ with your eyes?" Even reading the text I'm typing right now is giving me a slight headache, and there's no way to adjust the sharpness (none I've found anyway).
Decent-sized flat panels are starting to become affordable enough to warrant a purchase.
If you get a flat-panel you'll have to run at a specific resolution (usually 1280x1024), otherwise text will be blurry and crappy.
Quote:
Keep photos 125 pixels wide or less.
Hang on...
The rules that I keep going back and checking, and rechecking are:
Quote:
The maximum sig dimensions are 325 pixels high and 575 pixels wide (including text).
Plud with a warning to keep all images under 100 K collectivey...
That's the sig dimensions, but the first quote pertains to avatars.
Does this mean my sig is too big?
I could resize it if it is, but it gets REALLY screwy when I do...
Thank you SOOOO much SH, i was getting worried over nothing...
Phew...
Abi: Yours is just within the limit, but I resized it anyway.
Edit: Image removed cos I took it off my space after Abi uploaded it to hers, and the thread was bumped. Red Xs aren't very pretty.
woah, HSW is a mod?
we seriously need a topic on who's a mod and who's not.
Wow i'm confused.
I made a detailed list of 99% of the staff members with mod powers onboard, labelling them as active or inactive and mod/admin/ezop/janitor{me}, but it got eaten by the hack. I don't feel like doing it again.
| EzOP - True Red Vector Admin Mod Eliteboard Mod Whipping Boy |
LOL@EDIT
Craig's the expendable Red Shirt of the Starship Mofo. 😡
TR: "Alright, we're going down to the surface to meet with the natives."
RICO: "Dammit Red! I'm a moderator, not a welcoming committee!"
SAM: "Logically speaking, it may be wise to consider that the trolls of Spammer Alpha Six may be hostile in nature."
TR: "Good thinking, we need someone who can draw their fire. Mr. Bayfield, you're with us."
CRAIG: "YAYZORS!"
I've been looking for an excuse to steal Becca's pic >.>
}:O
COMBINE AND CONQUER!
Go Lackey, protect that alpha quadrant full of rebels =D
*laughs* ^^;;
my edit of an edit has been edited further!
Hmm, I didn't realize homosexual marriage was such a big deal (Eg. With all the health problems homosexual activities cause, ect...) but I still would probably tend to agree with TheCycle after reading through that thread.
As for the topic at hand, in my opinion, TheCycle is like that pretty much most of the time. While I'll admit I can't always tell whether or not something is an insult, it seemed to me that the comments you were quoting were probably not intended to offend as much as they did.
The "I dunno if you ever took history" comment doesn't really sound much like an insult to me, I think he's saying he isn't aware of what education you've had, like you mentioned was possible. The "the universe does not revolve around Christianity" looked to me more like an explanation than an insult, and either way it seemed as if he was just backing up his comments about ancient civilizations including marriage long before Christianity came about, which in turn seemed to be backing up that marriage didn't necessarily have to be tied into any exact religion, culture, ect... The "you're full of it" comment probably was an insult, and I myself would probably say it's an exaggeration too. I wouldn't call it a petty insult, since he kinda backed it up, but that part was probably a bit too extreme.
However, the comment implying you didn't have "a real, informed opinion" was justified. Well, that is, if people's comments toward my posts earlier on were justified. Let me just compare these. I remember once saying I thought the U.S. still had the draft. That got a few insults thrown my way (Though I forget what they were) and even made people refuse to take what I say seriously for a while, despite that I later explained that the reason I thought the U.S. still had the draft was that people I knew IRL told me it did.
Now what does that have to do with this, you might ask? Well, this is a comparison. In your case, you apparently assumed the same sex marriage legislation was forcing churches to perform same sex marriages just as well as they would opposite sex marriages, right? Well that assumption was very, very wrong (Considering we're dealing with the FEDERAL version of the legislation...) and I think you gave Cyke the impression your views on the issue were misguided. Especially since churches aren't the only places to be married in, as Rico pointed out. But either way, the bill doesn't force people who perform opposite sex marriages to perform same sex marriages, at least not yet, since for now it mainly allows places to perform same sex marriages. Key word, allows.
And you didn't even explain why you thought that way... what was your assumption from? Was it from others telling you? Was it from reading some anti-Canadian article? Or did you just feel it was a logical conclusion to come to? 
I understand you aren't a Canadian, and maybe wouldn't necessarily have the whole story of the bill, or the reasons behind why the bill wouldn't go too far, told to you. Fair enough. While you aren't Canadian, I'm not American. My comments about the U.S. weren't about my own country either, and while I couldn't have expected you to know much about the Canadian bill, how could I have been expected to know much about the U.S?
Quite frankly, if people got the impression I make up facts as I go along because of my argument, which wasn't the main topic (It was in fact one about Sonic comics and it was sort of a "why don't you complain about this" argument) then I think it'd only be fair people get the impression you have a completely uninformed view of it because of an argument that seemed to be you saying why you even cared about the topic. I know I'm leaving another few of my comments out, but still the point is I feel since my comments were considered misguided, so should the comments that SilverShadow made.
Not trying to nag, but perhaps instead of making a comment based on your assumption, you could have asked "Does this bill force people to perform same-sex marriages if they don't want to" somewhere in your first post in that thread, if you had a doubt it was true, as that would've most likely been more practical.
No offense though. 
"> And sorry if it sounded whiny, but I feel it'd be quite fair (If not still in his favour) since if I'd be attacked for something, others should be attacked just as much for it.
Anyway, not meaning to play favourites, but I prefer the way Tergonaut handled it. He explained why he got the impression he did, he explained that he was merely defending SilverShadow, and even apologized many times at the end. I doubt I myself would've had the will to do that, (Albeit others here probably would) and I was glad to know that Christianity promotes tolerance. 
You bumped an old topic that has already been resolved. Congratulations.
>> @ Deck
Yeah...the problem's been solved, Matt. It was nice to read your veiws, though. ^^ Was a bit long...but hey- I don't mind. I guess.
Deckman92: I withdraw my comments from the chat, part of the reason I bumped the thread was because I figured since it was on the upper part of the first page it wasn't TOO old, (As I was quite used to the other boards) but I should have checked the date on the last post first, since I didn't realize it was THAT old...
AbiJayEchidna: Glad to see you don't mind that the post was long. I don't know you'd react to how long some of my other posts were though.
Just wanted to let that bit out. Ok, I'll try to let it die now.
If you are not staff, do NOT bump topics addressed to the staff, especially not to comment on a dead issue.
