Page 34 of 87
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:09 am
by Shadow Yoshi
That's because you just renamed the file from JPG to PNG, so it's still a JPEG but with "png" as the file extension. It needs to actually be saved as such.
EDIT: "Online" on post profiles will be available once I upgrade the board software, which will hopefully be pretty soon. There will only be an "online" icon, as being offline is implied when that icon is absent.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:25 am
by Fuyu
I came up with the avatar extension because I wanted to use an image randomizer that produces PNGs. So because of that I won't be able to use it here, right? That's what I meant by the suggestion being rather selfish.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:26 am
by Shadow Yoshi
Open up whatever avatar you want to use in Paint.NET and save it as a PNG, then try uploading it again.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:29 am
by Fuyu
It worked, I guess the problem isn't that it's a PNG then, but rather that it doesn't accept my
randomizer link.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:23 pm
by Julia Pseudo
I guess I can understand that excited feeling about not knowing the secret cheat, if you don't mind me returning to this for a second. I guess the reason it was frustrating to me before I learned it is because, in earlier SMBX versions, cheats didn't disable saving in the first place (and the secret cheat didn't exist AFAIK). It really grinded my gears when it started disabling saving, preventing me from cheesing my way through hard levels, and I had no idea how to get it back for over a year. I guess it's kind of a dumb reason. I can respect keeping the cheat secret, I guess. It might be more fun if you never had the ability it grants in the first place. Seriously though, I concede.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 8:02 am
by Mable
AeroMatter wrote:I swear to Christ, this secret cheat talk is garbage.
Nobody cares.
But you just responded to it so you do care. Also idt that you have to comment on it if you don't like ot. Geeze i was only asking a question about it how should i know people actually talk about it.
In all end i think you need to learn some respect actually.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:32 am
by aero
So anyway, has anything changed with the server hosting? Is Jason hosting anything now?
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 9:41 am
by Shadow Yoshi
Yeah, Jason has been kind enough to host everything for me.
Is anybody noticing any improvements in speed?
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:18 pm
by Fuyu
The page loading time has significantly improved for me. I used to have to wait two or three full seconds, now the page loads on like one second. Sometimes it may take a bit more time, but that rarely happens. So kudos to Jason.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:20 pm
by Julia Pseudo
Yeah, page loading is super quick for me as well. Thanks, Jason.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:41 pm
by Mivixion
Yeah, much faster. Kudos, Jason.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 3:19 pm
by FanofSMBX
Joey wrote:No frustration has been caused, with the exception of that brought about by those who knew the cheat and chose to waste their time trying to argue about it.
Let me reiterate that the cheat is not listed because that seems to have been the original intention which is going to be upheld. The cheat is censored in part to support that, but it's also really annoying when people try to skirt around it. It's not like it's an important or necessary game mechanic, so it's okay to not make it immediate obvious to everybody. Seriously. It's not like we're trying to hide it and limit it to people, we're just trying to keep it on the DL. Retrospectively, however, including something like "Demilogic is cool." (replace Demilogic with Redigit) really isn't that bad as it doesn't expose that it's actually a cheat.
Ok, when you put it that way I actually sort of understand. I don't really have investment anymore, but Redigit DID remove SMBX from SMB.org. That could be construed as Redigit's creative intention.
Oh, and PS: I think a useful feature would be a light gray name color for members that haven't logged in over a month.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 3:28 pm
by Mable
FanofSMBX wrote:but Redigit DID remove SMBX from SMB.org.
Rather said he HAD to remove it as Nintendo told him to do so.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:18 pm
by TLtimelord
Jason is a great guy. :)
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 12:22 am
by Bryan
Of course, Jason is awesome!
Is the HTML and CSS not loading for anyone else on the SMBX Wiki?
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 12:27 am
by Shadow Yoshi
Wiki update: Something seems to have been messed up while moving servers, resulting in the lack of wiki theme. Instead of further attempts to fix this, I'm going to upgrade the forum software and then restart the wiki so that I can hook the wiki into the upgraded software (instead of having to redo the hook whenever the board software is upgraded in the future, and so that the problem gets fixed).
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2016 5:19 pm
by CynicHost
I think there should be a forum games section, since we're only allowed to use the roleplaying section for stories. Posting there wouldn't affect people's post count, like the old Introductions section.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2016 5:41 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
Forum games (in that format) do nothing but promote immature posting habits, which is something we can't have here.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2016 5:56 pm
by Sevennights
Well something could be done with the sections that the use game masters moderate, like ask who would do things and suggestions there, (and no fourm games, i really saw how fourm games go, and it is really... really sad.) In other words, ask people if we should have these fourms or sub fourms at all, then maybe we should get rid of them as activity is low, and it looks like alot of mindless posts (looking at the roleplaying section) My request might be regarded as pointless but it is sad, it might be that activity shows that they might not be needed here, I personally want things to change.
Re: Site Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2016 6:10 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
What are you even requesting, Jacob? I don't understand.
