Boards > Lifestyle

dem_z

United Kingdom

June 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:31 AM

JoshXXX said:
Where would one go on the internet to find downloadable episodes of Full Metal Alchemist?

Usenet news.

McBane13

I'm lost

April 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:37 AM

swingkitten said:

JaiDee said:

Hercules!

Mr. Satan actually.

Is it really the jpegs that you mind?

How does a hotlinked jpeg in a thread that you don't access affect your bandwidth? (Serious question, I don't know much about this HHTP thing.) Surely images that aren't hotlinked - that are held on the SG server - would affect performance more.

Or is it just the busy threads that are affecting performance of SG on your connection?

dem_z

United Kingdom

June 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:49 AM

Lemonkid said:

Nimhly said:

bredoteau said:
Are we talking about threads like "Post your favorite SG with Nike shoes," and the like? If so, that has been thoroughly ridiculed by Lemonkid (favorite urethra, or something), and sheesh, I enjoy them.

is THAT what this thread is about? if so, i agree with mkmcwhatshisnumbers.

I believe the thread was... "SG Fallopian Tubes."

*ahem*
DO suicide girls have fallopian tubes?

MoralityDies

Berkeley, CA

October 2003

JAN 24, 2005 11:59 AM

Nimhly

Green Bay, WI

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:03 PM

demetrius_z said:
Is it really the jpegs that you mind?

How does a hotlinked jpeg in a thread that you don't access affect your bandwidth? (Serious question, I don't know much about this HHTP thing.) Surely images that aren't hotlinked - that are held on the SG server - would affect performance more.

Or is it just the busy threads that are affecting performance of SG on your connection?

good point, that's my question, too. The actual thread pages with these pictures would take a long time to load, but i dont' think that's really an issue, since people with slow connection would just not go to those pages. Most of the images we use in a certain unnamed group are hosted offsite.

so it would be the threads that are posted in really rapidly that's the concern then, right?

DeadlyEye

Memphis, TN

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:38 PM

did you guys hear something?

legionnaire

Belgium

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:48 PM

Nimhly said:

demetrius_z said:
Is it really the jpegs that you mind?

How does a hotlinked jpeg in a thread that you don't access affect your bandwidth? (Serious question, I don't know much about this HHTP thing.) Surely images that aren't hotlinked - that are held on the SG server - would affect performance more.

Or is it just the busy threads that are affecting performance of SG on your connection?

good point, that's my question, too. The actual thread pages with these pictures would take a long time to load, but i dont' think that's really an issue, since people with slow connection would just not go to those pages. Most of the images we use in a certain unnamed group are hosted offsite.

so it would be the threads that are posted in really rapidly that's the concern then, right?

If that's the case then I doubt it's slowing down the site. I'm certainly no IT expert but my guess is that activity is activity - whether it's concentrated within one thread or spread out across the rest of the site.

Nimhly

Green Bay, WI

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 01:04 PM

legionnaire said:

Nimhly said:

demetrius_z said:
Is it really the jpegs that you mind?

How does a hotlinked jpeg in a thread that you don't access affect your bandwidth? (Serious question, I don't know much about this HHTP thing.) Surely images that aren't hotlinked - that are held on the SG server - would affect performance more.

Or is it just the busy threads that are affecting performance of SG on your connection?

good point, that's my question, too. The actual thread pages with these pictures would take a long time to load, but i dont' think that's really an issue, since people with slow connection would just not go to those pages. Most of the images we use in a certain unnamed group are hosted offsite.

so it would be the threads that are posted in really rapidly that's the concern then, right?

If that's the case then I doubt it's slowing down the site. I'm certainly no IT expert but my guess is that activity is activity - whether it's concentrated within one thread or spread out across the rest of the site.

then i wonder what the problem is?

legionnaire

Belgium

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 01:16 PM

Nimhly said:

legionnaire said:

Nimhly said:

demetrius_z said:
Is it really the jpegs that you mind?

How does a hotlinked jpeg in a thread that you don't access affect your bandwidth? (Serious question, I don't know much about this HHTP thing.) Surely images that aren't hotlinked - that are held on the SG server - would affect performance more.

Or is it just the busy threads that are affecting performance of SG on your connection?

good point, that's my question, too. The actual thread pages with these pictures would take a long time to load, but i dont' think that's really an issue, since people with slow connection would just not go to those pages. Most of the images we use in a certain unnamed group are hosted offsite.

so it would be the threads that are posted in really rapidly that's the concern then, right?

If that's the case then I doubt it's slowing down the site. I'm certainly no IT expert but my guess is that activity is activity - whether it's concentrated within one thread or spread out across the rest of the site.

then i wonder what the problem is?

I don't know, but whatever it is appears to have been fixed.

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 03:00 PM

I didn't read the whole thread, but, here's my 2 cents:
1. 1:05 threads are labeled as such because staff asked for them to be that way, not to discourage anyone else from commenting, but warning people that don't enjoy our threads not to alow themselves to get annoyed by not clicking on it.
2. Olivia has expressed, many times, that she does not need help policing the site for space. She has her job under control. Besides browser crashing smilie armies...

Some people seem to enjoy being confrontational crybabies. Others don't.

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 03:08 PM

One more thing:

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

Bitch, please.

Eero

USA

August 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:11 PM

no.

MoralityDies

Berkeley, CA

October 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:13 PM

delusion said:
One more thing:

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

Bitch, please.

hahaha!! i love this site.

RACER_X

Philadelphia, PA

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:17 PM

mk700c said:
70+ page long threads with 20 hotlinked JPEGs per page, being constantly refreshed by 40 people.

It makes everything sooooo sloooooowwwwww.

iChat is a wonderful thing kids; you can invite as many as you want to the party and drag and drop images allll dayyyy long. I promise.

*edited to add*

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

[Edited on Jan 23, 2005 by mk700c]

An excellent idea...keep the circle jerks off the boards and stop eating up bandwith.

GravesForTheDays

Grand Rapids, MI

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:54 PM

I'll stop eating bandwidth when you stop complaining about everything.

Sound like a deal?

mk700c

Ann Arbor, MI

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 04:01 PM

delusion said:
One more thing:

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

Bitch, please.

I'll take someone else's funny for $100

mk700c

Ann Arbor, MI

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 04:03 PM

delusion said:
I didn't read the whole thread, but, here's my 2 cents:
1. 1:05 threads are labeled as such because staff asked for them to be that way, not to discourage anyone else from commenting, but warning people that don't enjoy our threads not to alow themselves to get annoyed by not clicking on it.
2. Olivia has expressed, many times, that she does not need help policing the site for space. She has her job under control. Besides browser crashing smilie armies...

Some people seem to enjoy being confrontational crybabies. Others don't.

Once again I'll repeat:

This was NEVER directed at the 105, the only people trying to make this about 105 v ???? seem to be 105 people.

I don't care who's doing it, I just care that it makes things slow.

DookieJones

Washington, DC

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:05 PM

uh-huh.....

TheDishwasher

Frederick, MD

July 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:05 PM

Racer_X said:

mk700c said:
70+ page long threads with 20 hotlinked JPEGs per page, being constantly refreshed by 40 people.

It makes everything sooooo sloooooowwwwww.

iChat is a wonderful thing kids; you can invite as many as you want to the party and drag and drop images allll dayyyy long. I promise.

*edited to add*

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

[Edited on Jan 23, 2005 by mk700c]

An excellent idea...keep the circle jerks off the boards and stop eating up bandwith.

but i like public circle jerks!

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ

January 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:07 PM

Nimhly said:

I always wondered what I would look like as a woman

DookieJones

Washington, DC

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:12 PM

SirPsychoSexy said:

Nimhly said:

I always wondered what I would look like as a woman

I'd do you...but only in a public circle jerk.

inabsentia

Missoula, MT

December 2003

JAN 25, 2005 05:11 PM

mk700c said:

delusion said:
One more thing:

Please, I ask as nicely as possible. Just do it to see me smile.

Bitch, please.

I'll take someone else's funny for $100

Only not

BOARDS:

TOPICS:

United Kingdom

June 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:31 AM

McBane13

I'm lost

April 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:37 AM

United Kingdom

June 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:38 AM

United Kingdom

June 2004

JAN 24, 2005 11:49 AM

Berkeley, CA

October 2003

JAN 24, 2005 11:59 AM

Green Bay, WI

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:03 PM

Memphis, TN

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:38 PM

Belgium

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 12:48 PM

Green Bay, WI

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 01:04 PM

Belgium

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 01:16 PM

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 03:00 PM

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 03:08 PM

USA

August 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:11 PM

Berkeley, CA

October 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:13 PM

RACER_X

Philadelphia, PA

February 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:17 PM

Grand Rapids, MI

November 2003

JAN 24, 2005 03:54 PM

mk700c

Ann Arbor, MI

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 04:01 PM

mk700c

Ann Arbor, MI

December 2003

JAN 24, 2005 04:03 PM

DookieJones

Washington, DC

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:05 PM

Frederick, MD

July 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:05 PM

Ridgewood, NJ

January 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:07 PM

DookieJones

Washington, DC

March 2004

JAN 24, 2005 04:12 PM

inabsentia

Missoula, MT

December 2003

JAN 25, 2005 05:11 PM