My 2 Cents re Mo-Solo's Negative Vibe

[Anonymous]

I'll let others chime in with feedback to see if there is a strong interest but from my perspective:

1. Adding images slows down the web page in general - it's pretty optimized with small images but adding 3 large images would probably double the page load time with the size of the images and 3 additional image requests. It also pushes the main content down. As I mentioned before, it gets in the way of the main goal of getting the latest information. While at first glance it may be visually more appealing, I prefer to minimize the use of graphics.

2. The code changes for the images above the top 2 articles would not be trivial. The images are also an odd size - relying on automatically cropping images within the article would likely not be effective, I would have to custom crop and upload an image for each one which would probably double / triple the time it takes to publish an article.

3. Adding a module in the right column with an image would not be that hard with the current software. Each image would likely need to also be custom cropped to fit in that location so that is a bit of additional publishing work. I did choose to feature images before at the top of the page early in the site's history, around 1997-1998 and the extra time it took to choosing / sizing images frequently became a bit too much. Keep in mind this is not a site like CNN or the NY Times where there are a staff of several editors / programmers focused on content full-time. Seems like there should be some text indicating why that image is there. Does it link to something? Maybe it's the image you chose and I am not the 'frink' type but I wouldn't have thought to feature this image. Perhaps you want to volunteer to be the photo editor?

1. With most people using broadband these days, it really doesn't slow down the site. It affects the bandwidth the site uses slightly and whether it has further cost to you, only you would know. It doesn't push the main content down, as I used the space that is already there, with the 'MAIN'/'Home'" title, which is pretty redundant anyway. So it doesn't get in the way of getting to the latest info. If the images are good, they help you know what the content would be about, before even reading the summaries of the articles.

2. You can choose whichever image size you want, but if you care about the visuals and what 'looks good', it sometimes means odd image sizes. I presume there are scripts out there that minimize the image to the desired size, or crop it, like for example on Facebook's main Timeline page, where there's a background image that expands when you go over it. As you want the stories to go up as fast as possible, it is best to rely upon an automatic script.
For stories that do not have pictures, or would only have pictures later on, you would use general images according to their category - i.e. Smiths related, shows, interviews, etc.

3. As for the module at the right of the page. Yes of course it would have a caption and a link to the relevant story. You can pick any theme you fancy.
I suggested random stories/pictures from the last month, because all you would have to do is put the pictures in one folder. I don't think cropping is less of an issue with the right pane module.
I acknowledge that commercial sites have staff, but I am sure there are automatic scripts out there that can resize and/or crop images on the fly, perhaps the outcome would not always be ideal being automatic and all, but it would mean less time and effort. I'm sure bigger sites use automatic tools as well - ready made templates or macros in Photoshop to crop the images to their site's needs. As it's important for you to get the story up, it would slow things down if you would have to rely on another person and wait for him or her to do their thing. It doesn't mean a lot of work, because there aren't too many stories in a week, like the NY Times has to deal with and some of the stories are would use generic images and would be already prepeard.

So I think it boils down to finding the right script for the site, or for cropping images to a predetermined size offline and on the fly - I can look around. If you want people to give their opinion on this look beforehand, that's fine by me.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I made a few mistakes up there, I meant cropping is less of an issue with the right pane.

[davidt]

1. With most people using broadband these days, it really doesn't slow down the site. It affects the bandwidth the site uses slightly and whether it has further cost to you, only you would know. It doesn't push the main content down, as I used the space that is already there, with the 'MAIN'/'Home'" title, which is pretty redundant anyway. So it doesn't get in the way of getting to the latest info. If the images are good, they help you know what the content would be about, before even reading the summaries of the articles.

2. You can choose whichever image size you want, but if you care about the visuals and what 'looks good', it sometimes means odd image sizes. I presume there are scripts out there that minimize the image to the desired size, or crop it, like for example on Facebook's main Timeline page, where there's a background image that expands when you go over it. As you want the stories to go up as fast as possible, it is best to rely upon an automatic script.
For stories that do not have pictures, or would only have pictures later on, you would use general images according to their category - i.e. Smiths related, shows, interviews, etc.

3. As for the module at the right of the page. Yes of course it would have a caption and a link to the relevant story. You can pick any theme you fancy.
I suggested random stories/pictures from the last month, because all you would have to do is put the pictures in one folder. I don't think cropping is less of an issue with the right pane module.
I acknowledge that commercial sites have staff, but I am sure there are automatic scripts out there that can resize and/or crop images on the fly, perhaps the outcome would not always be ideal being automatic and all, but it would mean less time and effort. I'm sure bigger sites use automatic tools as well - ready made templates or macros in Photoshop to crop the images to their site's needs. As it's important for you to get the story up, it would slow things down if you would have to rely on another person and wait for him or her to do their thing. It doesn't mean a lot of work, because there aren't too many stories in a week, like the NY Times has to deal with and some of the stories are would use generic images and would be already prepeard.

So I think it boils down to finding the right script for the site, or for cropping images to a predetermined size offline and on the fly - I can look around. If you want people to give their opinion on this look beforehand, that's fine by me.

I'm not worried about the cost - load time is a factor I pay a lot of attention to and have optimized over the years. While most people have broadband on the desktop, more people are accessing it through limited connections / mobile browsers. While you say it doesn't push the content down, it actually does with properly balanced whitespace, especially noticeable on limited screens such as mobile phones. You mentioned some of the elements are redundant but they are there for consistency with the other pages on the site and provide some hints on navigation. While there may be some scripts out there to help, I don't think there is any magic one - it would still be a considerable extra effort to get it set up right and on an ongoing basis.

I've actually looked at using some marquee type plugins for vbulletin in the past which have a similar idea to visualize features but prefer the text-based / chronological approach. There are already thumbnails for stories, not featured like you imagined but it works for the most part. I appreciate that you went to the trouble of creating the mockup and explained how you think it should work. I hope my explanations are reasonable.

I have waited for other feedback, so far I don't see anyone saying 'wow, that would really add value to the site' and I don't feel it myself to make it a high priority considering the tradeoffs and effort. A new version of vBulletin will be released sometime this year, perhaps it will include some similar functionality for the content management or make it easier to add it. I prefer not to add customization at this point as the changes would likely need to be re-written for the new version or may not be needed. The exception is the wiki mentioned in another thread which I think will add much more value and is the highest priority right now.

[Anonymous]

I'm not worried about the cost - load time is a factor I pay a lot of attention to and have optimized over the years. While most people have broadband on the desktop, more people are accessing it through limited connections / mobile browsers. While you say it doesn't push the content down, it actually does with properly balanced whitespace, especially noticeable on limited screens such as mobile phones. You mentioned some of the elements are redundant but they are there for consistency with the other pages on the site and provide some hints on navigation. While there may be some scripts out there to help, I don't think there is any magic one - it would still be a considerable extra effort to get it set up right and on an ongoing basis.

I've actually looked at using some marquee type plugins for vbulletin in the past which have a similar idea to visualize features but prefer the text-based / chronological approach. There are already thumbnails for stories, not featured like you imagined but it works for the most part. I appreciate that you went to the trouble of creating the mockup and explained how you think it should work. I hope my explanations are reasonable.

I have waited for other feedback, so far I don't see anyone saying 'wow, that would really add value to the site' and I don't feel it myself to make it a high priority considering the tradeoffs and effort. A new version of vBulletin will be released sometime this year, perhaps it will include some similar functionality for the content management or make it easier to add it. I prefer not to add customization at this point as the changes would likely need to be re-written for the new version or may not be needed. The exception is the wiki mentioned in another thread which I think will add much more value and is the highest priority right now.

We can put it on a new thread, as I don't think anyone goes into this one. Perhaps ask people how it looks on their mobiles and how fast it loads (though it's an image, it's only 376KB, without even lowering the quality, when it's in HTML and text it would be even smaller in size). I meant the text that reads 'MAIN' and the link to 'Home' are redundant and can also be easily moved. Adding a couple of images is while not a major change to the code, is a major change to the look and feel of the site. Even an image on the right-hand side, with the same mechanism of the banners can make a huge difference.

[smiler]

What happened to 'Viva Hate!', "hate makes the world go 'round" as Morrissey once said? Was that just an 80's thing? It appears what you want to say is 'Viva Hate! (but no hate towards Morrissey should be tolerated or anyone else I deem as a 'hater')'.

This is you at your most disingenuous, Morrissey wasn't endorsing hate, the statement "Viva Hate" was a reflection of the prevailing negative mood of the time. He wasn't saying hate is fun or good and we should all he hateful to each other more. When he said "Hate makes the world go round" it wasn't with delight it was with despair. Of course you must realise this, you are just deliberatley misunderstanding to make a point. Its the same point everytime "Morrissey says mean things too, so it must be okay to be mean" forgetting of course that Morrissey is a pop star/artist whereas this is a (hateful) fan website and context is everything. Then you follow it up with "Give me real examples" dispite being given real examples constantly and dismissing them all - can't you see the examples for yourself are you blind? they are everywhere. This kind of thing tells the tale on you, this site has a negative vibe because you want it to have a negative vibe. You're ongoing dispute with Morrissey has made you bitter and resentful and its visible on every page of the site (between the lines) but you can't let go. You are an obsessive completist super fan whose site has become a self-referencing warped parody, yet you have to stay till the bitter end. You can't back down even though you are in the wrong because "Morrissey would never back down" - yawn. You long for Morrissey to retire so you too can stop and so you promote the notion (held only by you, the majority of the mods and the three mental patients - and I don't even need to name them, hilariously EVERYONE knows who they are - even you!) that he is past it or greedy or mad or worse (dispite the facts) in the hope that fans will abandon him and force his hand. Trouble is fans aren't abandoning him they are abondoning here, he goes from strength to strength. This place isn't "free" or "open" like you boast, if it were it would be reflective of the opinions of real fans who by the way are buying tickets in record times the world over. These are good times for Morrissey the story is far from over, much to your dismay.

[Uncleskinny]

Here you are again, riding in on your white charger defending someone who you believe have been slighted. Slighted. Are you so thick that you don't understand the concept of opinion? David doesn't make every post on here, the users do, as you have done. Why don't you understand that very simple point? Not everyone agrees with you, and they are saying so. It seems to me that you want a site that only prints complimentary things about Morrissey. They exist, so go enjoy them. Here you get the whole gamut of opinion, and you don't like it. It's called life. People disagree. People have opinions you don't like. The more you fucking whine and whine and whine about David "...wanting the site to have a negative vibe..." the more stupid you look, if that's at all possible. You know what? I'll defend your right to say what the hell you like, but I'm going to pick up on outright ridiculousness. Let me say it again - the users make this site, the users comment.

P.

[smiler]

Here you are again, riding in on your white charger defending someone who you believe have been slighted. Slighted. Are you so thick that you don't understand the concept of opinion? David doesn't make every post on here, the users do, as you have done. Why don't you understand that very simple point? Not everyone agrees with you, and they are saying so. It seems to me that you want a site that only prints complimentary things about Morrissey. They exist, so go enjoy them. Here you get the whole gamut of opinion, and you don't like it. It's called life. People disagree. People have opinions you don't like. The more you fucking whine and whine and whine about David "...wanting the site to have a negative vibe..." the more stupid you look, if that's at all possible. You know what? I'll defend your right to say what the hell you like, but I'm going to pick up on outright ridiculousness. Let me say it again - the users make this site, the users comment.

P.

Lets not pretend Peter. The site is disproportionately dominated by a handful of people who think Morrissey is past it, greedy, mad or worse. Don't you recognise yourself? It isn't about disliking opinion. Lets be clear I DO NOT WANT THIS SITE TO PRINT ONLY COMPLIMENTARY THINGS, you repeat that endlessly because you can't actually address the points i raise. When you have moderators and T and C's you don't need to let trolls dominate. You don't need to allow negative voices to dominate when they are being disproportionaly loud, the tools are in place. It isn't "life" Peter because it doesn't reflect reality. Its a smokescreen, there is a negative bias here, simple as that, the clues are everywhere, look at this comment from David just now "The second one was added as it was an article on true-to-you.net that also mentioned Morrissey supposedly outselling Madonna and Bruce Springsteen. " - hey! whats with the SUPPOSEDLY - you gotta problem with someone David - why not just say it?

[Skylarker]

Lets not pretend Peter. The site is disproportionately dominated by a handful of people who think Morrissey is past it, greedy, mad or worse. Don't you recognise yourself? It isn't about disliking opinion. Lets be clear I DO NOT WANT THIS SITE TO PRINT ONLY COMPLIMENTARY THINGS, you repeat that endlessly because you can't actually address the points i raise. When you have moderators and T and C's you don't need to let trolls dominate. You don't need to allow negative voices to dominate when they are being disproportionaly loud, the tools are in place. It isn't "life" Peter because it doesn't reflect reality. Its a smokescreen, there is a negative bias here, simple as that, the clues are everywhere, look at this comment from David just now "The second one was added as it was an article on true-to-you.net that also mentioned Morrissey supposedly outselling Madonna and Bruce Springsteen. " - hey! whats with the SUPPOSEDLY - you gotta problem with someone David - why not just say it?

Here we go again...

[Uncleskinny]

Lets not pretend Peter. The site is disproportionately dominated by a handful of people who think Morrissey is past it, greedy, mad or worse. Don't you recognise yourself? It isn't about disliking opinion. Lets be clear I DO NOT WANT THIS SITE TO PRINT ONLY COMPLIMENTARY THINGS, you repeat that endlessly because you can't actually address the points i raise. When you have moderators and T and C's you don't need to let trolls dominate. You don't need to allow negative voices to dominate when they are being disproportionaly loud, the tools are in place. It isn't "life" Peter because it doesn't reflect reality. Its a smokescreen, there is a negative bias here, simple as that, the clues are everywhere, look at this comment from David just now "The second one was added as it was an article on true-to-you.net that also mentioned Morrissey supposedly outselling Madonna and Bruce Springsteen. " - hey! whats with the SUPPOSEDLY - you gotta problem with someone David - why not just say it?

And so it begins. Blind and deaf to everything. Look chummy - here's a rope, go and metaphorically hang yourself.

P.

[smiler]

And so it begins. Blind and deaf to everything. Look chummy - here's a rope, go and metaphorically hang yourself.

P.

hahahah - nothing to say i see guess that makes you dumb.

And look everyone I address David and BOOM as if by magic the mental patients begin to arrive

[Uncleskinny]

hahahah - nothing to say i see guess that makes you dumb.

And look everyone I address David and BOOM as if by magic the mental patients begin to arrive

Flawless logic. Absolutely brilliant.

P.

[smiler]

Flawless logic. Absolutely brilliant.

P.

no one asked you

[davidt]

This is you at your most disingenuous, Morrissey wasn't endorsing hate, the statement "Viva Hate" was a reflection of the prevailing negative mood of the time. He wasn't saying hate is fun or good and we should all he hateful to each other more.

It dosen't fit your agenda but did you ever notice that most of Morrissey's statements towards others are largely negative? Again, what do you want me to do, censor views that are perceived as 'negative'? Like what?

look at this comment from David just now "The second one was added as it was an article on true-to-you.net that also mentioned Morrissey supposedly outselling Madonna and Bruce Springsteen. " - hey! whats with the SUPPOSEDLY - you gotta problem with someone David - why not just say it?

Maybe you've been away a while and need to catch up, but look at the statement:

"The final ticket count for Morrissey's show at Bitan 1, at 5,900, out-sold recent shows by both Bruce Springsteen and Madonna." - true-to-you.net

and this comment in the thread, specifically:

Something is a bit off with the figures quoted in the TTY statement. I hate to knit pick, but, really...



I think 33,000 is slightly more than 5000.

http://www.billboard.com/events/roge...07586552.story
http://www.shalomlife.com/culture/17...ans-in-israel/

Also, Bruce Springsteen has never performed in Israel (as of yet). Promoters were discussing something last fall for this June (at the same stadium Madonna performed at), but the plans fell through.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-j...e-springsteen/



It's hard to think that his PR people could post such inaccurate statements. I mean, five minutes of Internet research could tell you this stuff. It seems it could be a bit embarrassing for Morrissey if it's not corrected by the TTY peeps and it were to get out into the regular press.
I understand that he is proud of how his show is selling, but come on...

Or maybe I'm just missing something behind the scenes?

If you feel it is 'negative' to question the statement that Morrissey outsold both Bruce Springsteen and Madonna in Israel after reading those links (and just using some common sense), it's probably best you just stay at true-to-you and stay 'positive'.

[Skylarker]

it's probably best you just stay at true-to-you and stay 'positive'.

[smiler]

It dosen't fit your agenda but did you ever notice that most of Morrissey's statements towards others are largely negative? Again, what do you want me to do, censor views that are perceived as 'negative'? Like what?


Maybe you've been away a while and need to catch up, but look at the statement:

"The final ticket count for Morrissey's show at Bitan 1, at 5,900, out-sold recent shows by both Bruce Springsteen and Madonna." - true-to-you.net

and this comment in the thread, specifically:



If you feel it is 'negative' to question the statement that Morrissey outsold both Bruce Springsteen and Madonna in Israel after reading those links (and just using some common sense), it's probably best you just stay at true-to-you and stay 'positive'.

I don't have an agenda. Again your point is the same "Morrissey says mean things so it must be okay" yes well spotted Morrissey sometimes says mean things, but so what? if he starts trolling this website then by all means ban him. Its about context - this is a fan forum. Again I am not saying I want censorship, stop pretending to misunderstand me. Someone made some senible suggestions earlier on in this thread and that got mocked, its clear you know what I mean, I'm not the only one saying it

I took "out sold" to mean "sold out faster than" when i read that statement on True to You, now I'm not sure what it means, it didn't even enter my mind at the time that it was suggesting Morrisey sold out bigger venues. Also it says "recent shows" not recent shows in Israel. Why make an issue out of it and why be snide about it? As though to say "He's trying to make out he's more popular than he really is - what a deluded fool - pft!"

[davidt]

This is you at your most disingenuous, Morrissey wasn't endorsing hate, the statement "Viva Hate" was a reflection of the prevailing negative mood of the time. He wasn't saying hate is fun or good and we should all he hateful to each other more. When he said "Hate makes the world go round" it wasn't with delight it was with despair.

Below is the quote which shows your statement that Morrissey wasn't endorsing hate is incorrect. Also, I don't feel hate is fun and we should all be hateful either. What I'm saying is that I'm not going to delete / ban / censor if people make statements that are.

http://motorcycleaupairboy.com/mozdisc1/vivahate.htm

"Like many other titles, it simply suggested itself and had to be. It was absolutely how I felt post-Smiths and the way I continue to feel. That's just the way the world is. I find hate omnipresent, and love very difficult to find. Hate makes the world go round."
- Morrissey explaining the title 'Viva Hate', Melody Maker, 3/12/88

[smiler]

Below is the quote which shows your statement that Morrissey wasn't endorsing hate is incorrect. Also, I don't feel hate is fun and we should all be hateful either. What I'm saying is that I'm not going to delete / ban / censor if people make statements that are.

http://motorcycleaupairboy.com/mozdisc1/vivahate.htm

"Like many other titles, it simply suggested itself and had to be. It was absolutely how I felt post-Smiths and the way I continue to feel. That's just the way the world is. I find hate omnipresent, and love very difficult to find. Hate makes the world go round."
- Morrissey explaining the title 'Viva Hate', Melody Maker, 3/12/88

He found hate everywhere, he felt it all around him, it was the prevailing, driving mood - thats exactly what i said before. He wasn't endorsing hate! Tell me you haven't thought he was actually endorsing hate for all this time, its an ironic declaration, don't you get it? He even says love is hard to find - its love he's looking for. Crumbs. This thread is already a smoking gun on your negativity. You always reach for the shitty end of the stick - why?

[Uncleskinny]

He found hate everywhere, he felt it all around him, it was the prevailing, driving mood - thats exactly what i said before. He wasn't endorsing hate! Tell me you haven't thought he was actually endorsing hate for all this time, its an ironic declaration, don't you get it? He even says love is hard to find - its love he's looking for. Crumbs. This thread is already a smoking gun on your negativity. You always reach for the shitty end of the stick - why?

Fucks sake. Give it up. You sad, sad, straw-clutching tool.

P.

[Kewpie]

He found hate everywhere, he felt it all around him, it was the prevailing, driving mood - thats exactly what i said before. He wasn't endorsing hate! Tell me you haven't thought he was actually endorsing hate for all this time, its an ironic declaration, don't you get it? He even says love is hard to find - its love he's looking for. Crumbs. This thread is already a smoking gun on your negativity. You always reach for the shitty end of the stick - why?

It's not David's view on Morrissey, it's YOUR VIEW on David's opinion.

You should go out and ask people on the street their opinions about Morrissey rather than come here to incite silly argument.

[davidt]

He found hate everywhere, he felt it all around him, it was the prevailing, driving mood - thats exactly what i said before. He wasn't endorsing hate! Tell me you haven't thought he was actually endorsing hate for all this time, its an ironic declaration, don't you get it? He even says love is hard to find - its love he's looking for. Crumbs. This thread is already a smoking gun on your negativity. You always reach for the shitty end of the stick - why?

How is "it was absolutely how I felt" an ironic declaration? His expression of hatred continues to this day. This thread is a smoking gun on your idiocy.