Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Sorry about the style. I accidentally overwrote the old style and I'll need to get the old one back, or a new one installed, before we can switch back. But at least SFN works now. *slaps himself
Martin Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Cap said: Sorry about the style. I accidentally overwrote the old style and I'll need to get the old one back, or a new one installed, before we can switch back. But at least SFN works now. *slaps himself anceps means two-headed doesnt it? homo anceps would mean "two headed man" like that Douglas Adams character----Zaphod. nice
Bettina Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Out of all the boards I go to, SFN seems to be the most troublesome. What is so different about this one? Bee
Klaynos Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Bettina said: Out of all the boards I go to, SFN seems to be the most troublesome. What is so different about this one? Bee No one else lets the Capn loose
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 29, 2007 Author Posted March 29, 2007 Martin said: anceps means two-headed doesnt it?homo anceps would mean "two headed man" like that Douglas Adams character----Zaphod. nice I think it has a deeper connotation though, for more of a person who doesn't know what to do or how to do it (two heads pointing different ways). Bettina said: Out of all the boards I go to, SFN seems to be the most troublesome. What is so different about this one? Bee We have a bad server, and we have me. Klaynos said: No one else lets the Capn loose Ahem.
Genecks Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Well, the logo is not back. Just making sure you know that.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 31, 2007 Author Posted March 31, 2007 Nor the rest of the old style. Switch to the SFN Beta Style if you want something shiny. dave will need to get the old style back if he has a backup somewhere.
Dak Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 oooh, shiney quick note: when it comes to coding the google-ads into this style, could you make sure it renders ok in 800*600 if possible? ta
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 31, 2007 Author Posted March 31, 2007 Whoops Thanks for reminding me, I'll have to insert them. Don't worry, the new location should be better (we can't put them where they used to be, I don't think).
Klaynos Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Dak said: oooh, shiney quick note: when it comes to coding the google-ads into this style, could you make sure it renders ok in 800*600 if possible? ta They also covered the Welcome, username section about pm's and stuff if you turned off images, which is annoying...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 31, 2007 Author Posted March 31, 2007 I think they'll fit better in this style. We'll see.
Sayonara Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Bettina said: Out of all the boards I go to, SFN seems to be the most troublesome. What is so different about this one? Bee One day Blike let the monkeys out of the cage to enjoy the sunshine. We never got them all back in. The thing about monkeys is that they really like fiddling with things.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted April 1, 2007 Author Posted April 1, 2007 Okay, dak, the ads are back; do they work where they are now?
insane_alien Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 the adds are next to the forum tree. the bit where it says Science Forums > General ... etc.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted April 1, 2007 Author Posted April 1, 2007 Yes, but do they work on low-res monitors?
Klaynos Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 They still cover the private message stuff with images turned off
Dak Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 Doesn't cover the SFN logo any more, but doesn't exactly look completely proper. can't upload pix in this forum, so: http://www.theologyforums.net/showthread.php?p=2566#post2566 btw, that 'jpeg' was a '.png' when i uploaded it to TFN
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted April 1, 2007 Author Posted April 1, 2007 Ah, crap, I thought I had fixed that. I think we're going to work out a better spot for the ads.
ydoaPs Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 How about the very bottom of the page? That seems like a spot where nothing is located. You could have one on each side of the copywrite bollocks.
Genecks Posted April 1, 2007 Posted April 1, 2007 Nah, the way it was is fine. I think it was nice for each forum board to have subboards.
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted April 2, 2007 Author Posted April 2, 2007 yourdadonapogos said: How about the very bottom of the page? That seems like a spot where nothing is located. You could have one on each side of the copywrite bollocks. Then nobody will click on them. Genecks said: Nah, the way it was is fine. I think it was nice for each forum board to have subboards. We're still trying to condense the current layout down so that it won't take up as much space. Suggestions are welcome.
MolotovCocktail Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 I have a question, what is the point of the Trash Can? I saw it in the Speculations and Pseudoscience forums.
Recommended Posts