c4countdown

I notice that with the new presenters, the forum has got a new colour scheme. Obviously this is an enormously important milestone in Countdown history, so we need opinions.

Personally, I think it's suspiciously trendy, and why hasn't it changed within the Countdown General subforum? The people demand answers.

It keeps changing. I can't handle this - I thought the whole point of Countdown was the same thing every day, to give us all structure in our lives. Or is the unsettling feeling I get from the constant change meant to be prepare me for the Countdown future? Will we love Countdown any more?

I'd advise against voting before I finish fiddling with it, although the usual crew of curmudgeons should feel free to vote against the change before it actually happens.

*hyperventilates*

edit: just count yourself lucky - I *was* going to title the thread "New colour scheme: Yay or Gay?", but thought better of it.

It's groovy

Just found by fiddling, that I've managed to set mine back to the way it was. I shall probably try the two schemes on alternate days (not alternative days, as that wouldn't make any sense ), and then maybe settle on the one I like the best.

I just hope Charlie is not done changing it yet...

Charlie Reams wrote:I'd advise against voting before I finish fiddling with it.

It looks good. So stop fiddling and get on with some work. Lazy, fucking, students.

One other forum that I have open a lot uses exactly the same style as the old one, so there's a case for me changing to the new style so that I can easily see which forum I'm using.

The only thing I don't like about the new is the ragged left edges of the posts, the positioning of which seems to depend upon the size of the avatars, but I'll certainly give it a go.

Funkeeeeeeeee.

The only thing I don't like is having to scroll down to see all the forums on the board index, I think they used to fit on one page.

Howard Somerset wrote:One other forum that I have open a lot uses exactly the same style as the old one, so there's a case for me changing to the new style so that I can easily see which forum I'm using.

That's the main reason I want to change it (as well as to reflect the new set and so on.) Many different forums use the default PHPBB skin and I'd like something a bit more personal. I'm still experimenting with new things and your patience and comments are appreciated.

I'm running a 1280x960 resolution and I can just get them all on the same screen if I line it up perfectly. I have to admit, after the three minutes I've given it, the scheme is growing on me.

I've changed back to ProSilver because I love it and the new one is uggers. I'm neutral to the change, therefore.

Positive from me so far too. It's always odd when any forum / website changes but you soon get used to it (people were outraged when facebook changed but I can't even remember how it used to look now).

I prefer the avatars on the left too.

Only thing I'm particularly keen on seeing in layout is that unread posts since last visit stick out clearly (often not so easy if it's a post in a 'stickie' thread).

I like.

ok - I think I like the third style. Veryeasy to change colour of text.

but best is you seem to have straightened out the left had edges.

I think I'll stick with this one for a while.



later - I see you've now straightened out the left had edges of the green style too. That was my main objection to it. This now seems very like yet another forum whose style I like, but there's no confusion as the background colour is different.

So my feelings are now leaning towards the green style

... until I find that there's a fourth.

I love the AeroGreen layout. Very funk-tastic indeed Charlie

Well, it's different!

love the new look Charlie, is there any chance though that you can link the c4countdown at the top of the board to the main forum page, cheers.

I love the new looks (both options) - but I switched back to the old style, since I seem unable to see which replies are new in either of the new ones.

Julie T wrote:Well, it's different!

I noticed that too.

Kai Laddiman wrote:

Julie T wrote:Well, it's different!

I noticed that too.

on the ball as ever Kai

Frank Rodolf wrote:I love the new looks (both options) - but I switched back to the old style, since I seem unable to see which replies are new in either of the new ones.

As far as I know Frank, in the AeroGreen layout, there are at least three ways to spot new posts.

1) The blue arrows that appear on the Board Index, will be lit up.
2) If you click on View Active Topics (or in the appropriate sub-forum), all the threads are listed in date/time order (starting with the most recent) and if the folder symbol (on the left side) is green, then there are new posts in that thread.
3) Once in a thread with a new post, if you see when the post was posted, which is mentioned in the top-right corner of the post (eg your post says Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:07 pm), next to the word posted is a symbol of a piece of paper, which will be flashing if it is a new post.

Hope this helps

I already noticed the first two, but...

Joseph Bolas wrote:3) Once in a thread with a new post, if you see when the post was posted, which is mentioned in the top-right corner of the post (eg your post says Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:07 pm), next to the word posted is a symbol of a piece of paper, which will be flashing if it is a new post.

Hope this helps

I completely missed the flashing - my eyes must be getting worse.

Thanks Joseph - it sure helped!

I like it!

I think it even matches the set as well!

Frank Rodolf wrote:I already noticed the first two, but...

Joseph Bolas wrote:3) Once in a thread with a new post, if you see when the post was posted, which is mentioned in the top-right corner of the post (eg your post says Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:07 pm), next to the word posted is a symbol of a piece of paper, which will be flashing if it is a new post.

Hope this helps

I completely missed the flashing - my eyes must be getting worse.

Thanks Joseph - it sure helped!

Glad I could help Frank

Also just to add to this, I've seen a 4th way, in which when you see the green folders on the left side of the sub-forums, there is a moving blue arrow and piece of paper, between the folder and the thread title

Joseph Bolas wrote:Also just to add to this, I've seen a 4th way, in which when you see the green folders on the left side of the sub-forums, there is a moving blue arrow and piece of paper, between the folder and the thread title

I've always been fairly confused by the symbology used in the list of threads - there seems to be a helluva lot more icons than is needed.
Did keep meaning to ask someone for an explanation of them all, but obviously now that most of you have moved to the new colour scheme that'd be a fairly futile line of enquiry.
And for what it's worth, I went straight back to the old design. I'd rather get two phpBB forums mixed up than a forum mixed up with Windows Media Player.

Matt Morrison wrote: And for what it's worth, I went straight back to the old design. I'd rather get two phpBB forums mixed up than a forum mixed up with Windows Media Player.

If only we had some user who was a professional web designer and could fix us a decent custom skin...

Charlie Reams wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote: And for what it's worth, I went straight back to the old design. I'd rather get two phpBB forums mixed up than a forum mixed up with Windows Media Player.

If only we had some user who was a professional web designer and could fix us a decent custom skin...

Hah! So long as you're serious and not going to laugh at me for responding as such, then it could probably be arranged, after Christmas mainly.
Did you not make the new theme yourself Charlie? I think I was under that impression from some message or other, or did you just 'download' the theme?
It'd certainly be good practise for me, is there a guide to making phpBB themes? (ideally, a list of the different graphical parts etc.)

I don't think this has anything to do with the new colour scheme as I'm still using the old one, but I've only noticed it since the new scheme was introduced: why do posts by the user 'Jimmy' simply have the words 'User avatar' where the graphic avatar would normally be? This doesn't seem to be the case for other users with no avatar.

Matt Morrison wrote: Hah! So long as you're serious and not going to laugh at me for responding as such, then it could probably be arranged, after Christmas mainly.
Did you not make the new theme yourself Charlie? I think I was under that impression from some message or other, or did you just 'download' the theme?
It'd certainly be good practise for me, is there a guide to making phpBB themes? (ideally, a list of the different graphical parts etc.)

I'm totally serious and that would be totally awesome. I don't know the first thing about making phpBB themes, although I do know that it's changed substantially between versions 2 and 3, so a lot of the older ones don't work.

Charlie Reams wrote:I'm totally serious and that would be totally awesome. I don't know the first thing about making phpBB themes, although I do know that it's changed substantially between versions 2 and 3, so a lot of the older ones don't work.

Alright, sounds good. I'll look into it more and see if I can come up with anything. Just making it would be practise enough that I wouldn't care if nobody used it but me

Phil Reynolds wrote:why do posts by the user 'Jimmy' simply have the words 'User avatar' where the graphic avatar would normally be? This doesn't seem to be the case for other users with no avatar.

I doubt this helps, but I know using Firefox if I'm refreshing the same thread a few times in a row then sometimes it will refresh with no user avatars loading at all - in which case they all are replaced with "User avatar". Recently one user kept coming up as an entirely blank user name so I couldn't see who was posting. No idea who it was (obviously) so can't tell you if that's been fixed or not, I imagine a temporary blip.

Matt Morrison wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:why do posts by the user 'Jimmy' simply have the words 'User avatar' where the graphic avatar would normally be? This doesn't seem to be the case for other users with no avatar.

I doubt this helps, but I know using Firefox if I'm refreshing the same thread a few times in a row then sometimes it will refresh with no user avatars loading at all - in which case they all are replaced with "User avatar". Recently one user kept coming up as an entirely blank user name so I couldn't see who was posting. No idea who it was (obviously) so can't tell you if that's been fixed or not, I imagine a temporary blip.

Yeah, it's an occasional glitch. No idea why it happens.

I meet that firefox glitch sometimes too. Must try it on opera sometime to see how it looks there.

However, now we're a couple of days into the new designs, I'm completely sold on the change. Indeed, this morning, I'd forgotten that it had changed until I came across this thread again. I've just looked back at another phpBB board and it looks tame compared with this one.

Definitely a good move.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:I know using Firefox if I'm refreshing the same thread a few times in a row then sometimes it will refresh with no user avatars loading at all - in which case they all are replaced with "User avatar".

Yeah, it's an occasional glitch. No idea why it happens.

I've just noticed that myself. But Jimmy's avatar is always replaced with the words 'User avatar', regardless of whether I refresh the thread or whether other people's avatars are displayed or not.

Phil Reynolds wrote:Jimmy's avatar is always replaced with the words 'User avatar', regardless of whether I refresh the thread or whether other people's avatars are displayed or not.

Who is this Jimmy and where can I found one of his posts?

Matt Morrison wrote:Who is this Jimmy and where can I found one of his posts?

I imagine he founds them all himself (or his brother does), but anyway you can find one here.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Who is this Jimmy and where can I found one of his posts?

I imagine he founds them all himself (or his brother does), but anyway you can find one here.

Despite you being a smart ass, I'll use my vast web design knowledge to let you know exactly why this is happening.

Images usually (and should) have ALT tags - a bit of alternate text that describes the image, intended for the following purposes:

• handicapped- and disabled-friendly browsers often don't use pictures
• only recently have mobiles and other handheld devices been good at handling pictures
• people can also choose (though I can't imagine why) to not have their browser display pictures at all
• search engines use this text to index pictures as they can't compute the graphical content

"User avatar" is the ALT tag for all the avatars - so why is it getting displayed for Jimmy?

If you see the user profile page, you can either upload a picture from your own PC, or specify a URL for the picture.
I am 99% sure that what 'Jimmy' has done is specify a URL for his picture, which is actually not a valid image file.

Therefore, the browser is trying to find the picture at the URL he supplied every time, but as it is failing it is just displaying the ALT text ("User avatar").

What took me longer to diagnose the problem is that since version 3, Firefox has stopped using image placeholders (these are blank boxes left in the position where a missing image should go, and if width and height measurements were supplied with the image, the box will be in the same place and the same size as the image would have been if it was found).

If you load up the page in Internet Explorer, you'll see that the image has a placeholder - and this blank box has "User avatar" written in it.
It's a far more sensible way of doing things, as it's quite clear looking at the IE page that an image is missing, something which is far less evident in Firefox, where the not-found image is simply replaced with its ALT text, and to the end user it simply looks like that text is supposed to be there.

Not only is this a bit confusing and less user-friendly, it's also fucking annoying for web designers - even if width and height ARE supplied for an image, Firefox will now no longer take those into account if the image is missing - so it can really mess up layouts.

Matt Morrison wrote:Despite you being a smart ass

Thank you. It is rather pert, even if I say it myself.

I am 99% sure that what 'Jimmy' has done is specify a URL for his picture, which is actually not a valid image file. Therefore, the browser is trying to find the picture at the URL he supplied every time, but as it is failing it is just displaying the ALT text ("User avatar").

Ah! That makes sense. Cheers Matt.

(Speaking of avatars, I approve of your new one - you look altogether less scary. But why are you pointing at your chin, and why does there appear to be a tyre print across your face?)

Matt Morrison wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Who is this Jimmy and where can I found one of his posts?

I imagine he founds them all himself (or his brother does), but anyway you can find one here.

Despite you being a smart ass

Phil Reynolds being a smart arse? No way!

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Despite you being a smart ass

Thank you. It is rather pert, even if I say it myself.

I once won a nice bum contest at uni. I say contest, it was just a friend of ours squeezing my bum and two of my housemates bums. But that's a win for me. Especially as it led to a brief but fun fling.

Phil Reynolds wrote:Speaking of avatars, I approve of your new one - you look altogether less scary. But why are you pointing at your chin, and why does there appear to be a tyre print across your face?

Because, Phil, I am Cool. And Cool People have Cool Beards.
Incidentally I am one of the least scary people you could meet.

Matt Morrison wrote:Incidentally I am one of the least scary people you could meet.

But everyone who smokes pot is scary. Surely the government wouldn't lie to me?

Charlie Reams wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:Incidentally I am one of the least scary people you could meet.

But everyone who smokes pot is scary. Surely the government wouldn't lie to me?

Hehe... always reminds me of various Bill Hicks routines about alcohol vs pot... scary stoners rarely exist.
Also a topic I covered in my dissertation - yes, that's right, i'm That Cool that I wrote my dissertation on the representation of marijuana in movies.

Charlie, is it possible to have a link back to the home page, or rather board index, in the top left corner where it says 'c4countdown'?

I used to click on the pic of Carol and Des to get back home as it's a bigger target to find than the smaller text of 'board index'.

I hope it's possible, and if you can do it "ta".

Matt Morrison wrote:I am Cool. And Cool People have Cool Beards.

That's a beard? I actually thought you were standing in the way of a Powerpoint presentation and those were lines of text being projected across your face. Seriously.

Charlie Reams wrote:Phil Reynolds being a smart arse? No way!

Not at the moment, as I can't think of a suitably zingy retort.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:I am Cool. And Cool People have Cool Beards.

That's a beard? I actually thought you were standing in the way of a Powerpoint presentation and those were lines of text being projected across your face. Seriously.

Haha, me too!

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:I am Cool. And Cool People have Cool Beards.

That's a beard? I actually thought you were standing in the way of a Powerpoint presentation and those were lines of text being projected across your face. Seriously.

Yep, me too. Having a beard projected onto your face would be pretty sweet.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:I am Cool. And Cool People have Cool Beards.

That's a beard? I actually thought you were standing in the way of a Powerpoint presentation and those were lines of text being projected across your face. Seriously.

Yep, me too. Having a beard projected onto your face would be pretty sweet.

Having a beard that looks like a beard being projected onto your face is pretty sweet.

Matt Morrison wrote: Having a beard that looks like a beard being projected onto your face is pretty sweet.

Having a projector that projects a beard that looks like a beard being projected onto your face by a projector is pretty... uh. No wait, I lost my train of thought there somewhere.

I would like to change my vote, the new colour scheme has grown on me.