Recently I've been noticing some use of the spoiler tag to hide images. Images that are well beyond the 800x600 dimension restriction and well above the 100kb limit (I am going by G&T image rule restrictions, as it's where I frequent here). I would understand that this is done to keep images from breaking a page's horizontal size, but the fact of the matter is that these images still have to load. Which puts a burden on people with not-so-great internet connections.
I can understand if a thread is labeled [NSF56k], because generally that means the first post in the thread is image heavy and it's a nice courtesy (and typically the images that splatter those posts are within the size restrictions).
The example that prompted this post is here: click.
My request is that the G&T mods note publicly that this doesn't sidestep the image restrictions. It's not a rampant issue, just something that comes up now and then that makes me (and possibly anyone else on dialup) go :x .
Otherwise, browsing the forums on 56kbps was pointless about 2 years ago, and when I had to do it last year I just ended up either turning images off or using Netzero's image compressor thingy.
Straight from the G&T rules thread which nobody ever reads:
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
Some forums implement their spoiler tags so that images won't be loaded until you open the spoiler.
Images don't load on these forums behind spoilers unless I click it.
Is that how it works? You'll have to forgive me if I haven't noticed. >.<
If that is indeed how it works, then I guess I'll have to refrain from clicking spoilers from now on. Self-control. I have none.
With other browsers, they do (though, there may be a Firefox extension to stop them).
Apparently there is. IMGLikeOpera
No idea how well it works though.
For example -
just so that people on 56k can know which spoilers to avoid.
Harder than it would be to link to the image anyway like you're supposed to.
Edit: I guess
Is there any chance we could change those rules? OPs are decidedly awesomer with awesome pictures.
And honestly, there's no excuse for not linking a gigantic image. Photobucket and Imageshack both give you the capability to post a thumbnail image as a link.
I don't think those have ever had that privilege. I think they're just marked to make it understandable that the front post is going to be filled with images that individually meet those requirements (or typically should). Unless it's like those Desktop threads, where images are going to be all over the thread itself.