In this thread, we shall brainstorm useful features that would make XCFSI cooler, more efficient, more convenient, and more democratic.

MWACE said I should make this thread when I gave him a suggestion, and I think it's a great idea.

So, to start us off:
Problem:
Many people don't have the best of monitors. And some of us have pretty hardcore monitors.
The result is that when images with a very high resolution are posted (which happens very frequently) the people with low screen resolutions cannot see the whole image, and the page is stretched out to an unbearable size, making it difficult and annoying to read and enjoy pictures.

Proposal:
Users are given an option in their Control Panel to select their preferred screen resolution. AGF will then keep every page a size that insures maximum comfort. Images that would expand the size of a page to monstrous proportions will instead be scaled down until they fit (both horizontally and vertically) on one screen, because there is nothing worse on a website than having to scroll horizontally AND vertically (perhaps with the exception of embedded MIDIs).
There will be an option to expand an image (maybe by clicking on it) that will expand an image to its original size and bloat the page, so that people that wish it can view an image in it's high res, scrolling beauty.

TL;DR:
Having to scroll sideways to see a thread makes for an unpleasant experience and in order to fix that, images should be scaled down to a smaller size.

In order to illustrate my point, I have attached an image of what I have to see when I check the Art Gallery. This is why I never visit it.

Actually, we can automatically resize images to prevent lateral scrolling without knowing your screen's resolution. Doing this and putting a "full view" button underneath [img]s should be an easy plugin with a big payoff in terms of functionality.

All you really need is the tl;dr in future posts (unless it's something really far out), hopefully XCFSI's dev staff has the wit to know a good idea when the hear one

Instead of a "full view" button, would it be possible to make the image the button?
And you should use this database for XCFSI when it's done. I really want to look at some of the art boards, but I can't really do that due to aforementioned resolution issues.

Nope, not interested in keeping this database. AGF needs a rebirth and clinging to an identity we can transend isn't work the huge-ass project it would be to get information from a MyBB database placed into a FluxBB db.

This post was last modified: 01-22-2009 12:39 AM by mwace.

Hey, betatesterman, good idea. As mwace said, should be easy enough.

But I want you to know that you can derive some more enjoyment from the Art forums as they stand. Right cilck on the oversized image and select "view image" (firefox... find equiv. for your browser, I think all have it). This usually brings up the image by itself, sized to fit in your browser.

Users customize the background color of their posts.

Looking at a post listing, somebody will be able to instantly identify the author of a post and BG color enhances the unique tone and voice of the user. Users can immediatly distinguish different content from different users in almost the exact same way that one can recognize who spoken words were made by.

Two-dimensional background colors of forum names and thread names. Saturation of a blue hue will describe how many new posts are in the board (darker blue means lots of newer posts), and darkness or lightness will describe total number of posts in the board (darker grey for boards with lots of activity, lighter grey for less active boards).

These won't be implimented until we get a bare-bones functioning XCFSI completed and move to that.

This post was last modified: 01-24-2009 03:25 PM by mwace.

The option to connect with a secure HTTPS connection would be nice. I like as much of my traffic encrypted as possible.

For one thing, I'm not sure of the necessity of having HTTPS for AGF, and for another, that costs money.  What's your reasoning for having it, beta?

This post was last modified: 01-26-2009 09:27 AM by MetalMan.

I agree, it would be nice, but as MetalMan says, it costs money. And, though it's my preference, my concern is not so pressing to justify the costs (and complexity).

I am quite interested in encrypting the entire net. Both private and governmental entities have increasingly prying eyes, and adding a layer of encryption to the net would greatly impair their voyeuristic efforts. Basically, the idea is to make eavesdropping more than a matter of simply grabbing plaintext off of the line. Two sites that have recently done this are isohunt and thepiratebay. Just visit them with https, and your session is encrypted.

The same thing could be done with phone calls, particularly with the rise of digital telephony (eg VOIP). This digitization allows (Allows, though I haven't seen or heard of it) tested, reliable encryption systems such as PGP, which uses public-key cryptography, to be applied.

Edit: Kickass! Phil Zimmerman, developer of PGP, has recently created just such an encrypted internet telephony product -- Zfone.

This post was last modified: 01-26-2009 10:37 PM by Truffle Troubadour.

HTTPS will need to endure a period of pay-for-service before it becomes an industrial standard. In an attempt to push for a total encrypted internet (and not a only-sketchy-websites-get-encrypted internet), I would be willing to adopt HTTPS if user donations cover at least 60% of the cost. This will be more practical following the launch of XCFSI and expansion of the AGF community.

In an unrelated note, user profiles in XCFSI will be designed to provide the user with a unique identity. They will be cutomizable; containing user-drawn visuals and textual conent. Avatars will play a large role in the postbit and textual avatars will be an option. There will, however, be no signatures in XCFSI.