Where Is My Free Speech Banner?

[Brinnie]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b271/artanderotica/pb_exceed01.jpg​

For those of you using free speech banners in your sig, and are seeing this image, It means exactely what it says: We have exceeded the damn photobucket bandwidth, yet again!

But fear not, I created a new photobucket account and will tell you how to swap them out for new ones.

• Go here: http://photobucket.com/albums/b271/artanderotica/
• choose a banner from the page and copy the link.
• go to edit signature and replace the the link between the IMG code.

You code should look something like this:

[URL=http://freespeechcoalition.com][IMG]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b271/artanderotica/d.gif[/IMG][/URL]

Please update your banner links

 

[Matthew Craig]

Or you could use imageshack.us and not worry about exceeding bandwith.

 

[Brinnie]

Or you could use imageshack.us and not worry about exceeding bandwith.

doesn't image shack only do thumnails?

 

[Matthew Craig]

doesn't image shack only do thumnails?

1024kb maximum upload capacity per image.

It will make a thumbnail for you but you don't have to use it, there is also a direct link given for the image location.

If you want a 2mb capacity image host try imagehigh.com

 

[Matthew Craig]

I made this .gif about 6 months ago..

http://img49.exs.cx/img49/254/MyMandyGif22.gif

And it's still going.

 

[Brinnie]

1024kb maximum upload capacity per image.

It will make a thumbnail for you but you don't have to use it, there is also a direct link given for the image location.

If you want a 2mb capacity image host try imagehigh.com

what's the catch?

 

[Matthew Craig]

what's the catch?

No catch. It's a free service that's specifically designed to host your images. As good as it sounds.

 

[Brinnie]

No catch. It's a free service that's specifically designed to host your images. As good as it sounds.

Don't they make it to where.... wait. How do they make their money?

 

[Matthew Craig]

Don't they make it to where.... wait. How do they make their money?

I don't know.

But it's a free service and always has been.

Reliable too.

 

[ruminator]

Just out of curiosity, would it save any money overall if the image is on the same server as Lit? I don't know if it's possible or if it would help keep somebody's costs down....just thinking

 

[Matthew Craig]

Just out of curiosity, would it save any money overall if the image is on the same server as Lit? I don't know if it's possible or if it would help keep somebody's costs down....just thinking

Problem is you can't use image tags on attachments.

 

[ruminator]

Problem is you can't use image tags on attachments.

I figured it would have to be set up specifically for the use. That's probably one of the reasons that doesn't work now.

If it was set up in a way like avatars load or some way similar. It would be a special case for the owners to consider. Besides individual browser settings, that has to be a staggering number of times that image is loaded/transferred.

 

[Matthew Craig]

I figured it would have to be set up specifically for the use. That's probably one of the reasons that doesn't work now.

If it was set up in a way like avatars load or some way similar. It would be a special case for the owners to consider. Besides individual browser settings, that has to be a staggering number of times that image is loaded/transferred.

Then they're paying for the bandwidth. And i hear it's pretty costly these days. Also.. It would never happen.

 

[ruminator]

Then they're paying for the bandwidth. And i hear it's pretty costly these days.

Right, but it's for a cause specific to this site. If Lit isn't based on preserving free speech then it's failing in it's cause.

My questions were addressed at whether or not any bandwidth would be saved by hosting the image on the same server as the site. I realize it still has certain paths it has to travel but I thought some might be eliminated.

 

[Matthew Craig]

If Lit isn't based on preserving free speech then it's failing in it's cause.

Well then i guess we won't see you around anymore... Because it will never happen. lit won't host the .gif, you can count on it.

 

[ruminator]

Well then i guess we won't see you around anymore... Because it will never happen. lit won't host the .gif, you can count on it.

You mean,...this is goodbye? It's all so sudden, so unexpected.

I didn't say the owners had to host an image to promote free speech.

I was wondering about the technical aspects of the image being cached and only sent out on new requests to keep any cost down. The best way to do it would be for each sigline to have it's own image in a free image hosting account but that still costs more money overall.

 

[Matthew Craig]

You mean,...this is goodbye? It's all so sudden, so unexpected.

I didn't say the owners had to host an image to promote free speech.

I was wondering about the technical aspects of the image being cached and only sent out on new requests to keep any cost down. The best way to do it would be for each sigline to have it's own image in a free image hosting account but that still costs more money overall.

Lit is not an image hosting service it is a bulletin board website.

Attachments are available for its own users but hotlinking is disabled to prevent abuse.

What part about this don't you understand?

 

[ruminator]

Lit is not an image hosting service it is a bulletin board website.

Attachments are available for its own users but hotlinking is disabled to prevent abuse.

What part about this don't you understand?

You sounded just like an owner of a site like this would sound in denying a request that wasn't made.

The part I don't understand is why signatures aren't restricted the way hotlinking is.

 

[Matthew Craig]

The part I don't understand is why signatures aren't restricted the way hotlinking is.

Why should the be restricted?

 

[ruminator]

Why should the be restricted?

For the same reason hotlinking is restricted.

To prevent abuse.

 

[Matthew Craig]

For the same reason hotlinking is restricted.

To prevent abuse.

And how exactly can one abuse a signature?

 

[ruminator]

And how exactly can one abuse a signature?

Having excessive amounts of bandwidth wasting redundancy that calls shit from all over the world every time a page is loaded.

I would guess that our avatars are restricted from being loaded remotely to anywhere other than Lit pages. The same restrictions could be placed on a single sigline image that isn't even being considered as a serious request.


Or are you saying that other database requests can be mixed in with what the unsuspecting average user can realize?

 

[Matthew Craig]

Having excessive amounts of bandwidth wasting redundancy that calls shit from all over the world every time a page is loaded.

I would guess that our avatars are restricted from being loaded remotely to anywhere other than Lit pages. The same restrictions could be placed on a single sigline image that isn't even being considered as a serious request.


Or are you saying that other database requests can be mixed in with what the unsuspecting average user can realize?

Sorry, but somehow i don't think Brinnie is impressed by your techincal nonsense.

 

[ruminator]

Sorry, but somehow i don't think Brinnie is impressed by your techincal nonsense.

Another one of the harsh realities of loss in my life.

eh,..I just roll on bye.