Posts by Taylor Gonzalez79

boldhound8 said:I tried using Ovin - http://userscripts.org/scripts/versions/38806

but something isn't working quite right... 😁 I can manage to collect stuff, but I just can't get it to expand at all. 😁

Yeah, I haven't exactly been a genius with this either. 😬

I think he was using something else entirely. If he doesn't want to post it here, he should at least send it over via DM. 🙂

Jacob Foster11 said:Unknown 😉

So what now? Where am I supposed to go to find the script?

Alex Reed26 said:WHAT A LEGEND 🙏 🙏

I was just crunching the numbers. With 33,000 posts, assuming a meager average of 10 words per entry, Mickey has clocked roughly 333,000 words on this forum alone. At this rate, he could have published a full-length novel!

Maybe one day, who knows, we'll actually get a math textbook based entirely on your posts. 🙏

I have to admit, I’m noticing it too. It’s pretty obvious this isn't just some random forum user who can't keep their emotions in check—it's clearly calculated. He probably churned out those hundred clones because he felt slighted by how things were handled. But honestly? I don't think anyone is going to tear down the entire PDF structure just to let him back in through the front door. At the very least, we should stick to Sasha's method—tell him to reach out in a month, two months, maybe six... and if there hasn't been a single complaint by then, we consider letting him back on.

Chuck Norris has tracked down every single thread ever started by Richard Wilson4. 🙏

After Michael, none of these clowns will ever measure up again.

driftinggull21 said:My avatar looks pixelated ever since I updated it. Does anyone have any advice?😁

Look, you’re better off just hunting down the original high-res version and scaling that down. There's honestly no point in trying to upscale this one—it's just a lost cause... 😉

Maria Barnes said:Kid, please. You're tiny. 😁

Well then, why don't you share a few pixels with the rest of us? 🙂

So, is my guy actually for real?

Rachel Reed2 said:Well, you've officially buried him... 🤣

That 3125 figure is a negligible percentage compared to a modest 1280x1024 screen resolution of 1,310,720 pixels.
3125 is just 0.23%.
What a massive difference. If we include five posts per screen, we hit a staggering 1.15%.😲

Your math is annoying.😁

That’s my signature move. ☕

Those 3,125 are a tiny fraction compared to the measly 1280x1024 resolution—which is only 1,310,720 pixels.
3,125 is just 0.23%.
Pff, what a massive difference. If we say there are about 5 posts per screen, we're looking at a whopping 1.15%... 😲

Numbers are such a pain in the neck. 😁

There's too much of that 0.23% going on. To actually make that work, they'd have to resort to some pretty painful cuts. And I don't think anyone's interested in that right now—especially not with the elections coming up.

Alex Cook said:So, are we feeling pro-pixel-peepers here, or what? Are you guys for it or against it? ☕

I used to be all for it, but since nothing ever actually happens, now I'm against it. At the end of the day, it's more important to just be right, yawn... ☕

Alex Cook said:Look, mine isn't even the best example since it’s white text on a light background—so the visibility is pretty crappy—but if there was actual contrast, you’d definitely see the difference. Either way, those extra 25 pixels aren't going to break the page size or slow down the load times...🤷

50X50=2500
75X75=5625

It was under 3125 pixels before.

CTRL +

Well, looks like they finally bumped up the avatar sizes. Just when you thought they couldn't make things any more cluttered... ☕

Look, this isn't some picture book or a gallery... ☕

I haven't checked out the second one yet, but man, that first movie was fantastic. That scene where they're all sitting around the table the next morning... if you haven't clicked on that, it's hard to believe you'll actually get what makes the film work.

Man, people are really going out of their way to attack one single spammer. Honestly, if you just want him gone, have him make a clone account—don't bother banning him from Formula 1 and calling it a day. It's not like there's some massive corporation backing Maminh anyway. ☕

Jeffrey Taylor49 said:I mean, Taylor Gonzalez79, if we went by that logic, everyone in my soccer circles would be getting banned every three days... 😁

So, et cetera, where else are you going to find such massive savings on forum bandwidth? 😁

Nicholas King said:How exactly does "killing a discussion" happen by locking a thread after 10,000 posts and just starting a new one with a link to the old one? 😕

Unless they aren't just locking the previous thread but actually deleting it—which would be completely idiotic.

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve asked why we don't just move the archive to a separate, totally locked sub-forum—but honestly, I feel like I might as well be howling at the moon here... and I have a sneaking suspicion the reasons are just being cheap and penny-pinching 😁.

It gets ruined because on a site like ESPN, you might have a seasonal Premier League thread where everything stays themed together. Maybe you're expecting an answer from someone, but you won't get it because the conversation is buried in some ancient thread. Or maybe you need to reference a post from the start of the season, but you can't even quote it. If you haven't dealt with threads like that, then I guess I shouldn't expect you to get it.

Christian Taylor3 said:Every major forum in the world does this. There's probably a reason for it.

They once ran an experiment with monkeys. There were five of them in a cage, all connected to an electric circuit. Every time one of them reached for a banana, the whole group got a shock. Over time, they swapped out the monkeys, and every time a new one arrived, the existing ones would automatically stop him from getting near the banana. Eventually, they ended up with five completely different monkeys who weren't even connected to the electricity, yet they still wouldn't touch the banana. The point: Don't be a monkey.

wiredfalcon2 said:failing to take basic moderator actions—like actually scrubbing the spam—is what causes forums to tank🤣

Does every single subforum really need its own little chat thread? I mean, what’s even the point of having an Offtopic section or a General Hangout if we're just duplicating everything everywhere?

And honestly, if spam on all the other threads was being dealt with consistently according to the rules, the sheer volume of junk would drop significantly...

Get rid of this useless rule about needing 10,000 posts in constructive threads. It’s honestly achieved absolutely nothing—all it does is kill the flow of actual discussions... We should be focusing our energy on rooting out the spam instead of putting handcuffs on people who actually want to write meaningful content.