Announcement

**Dauphin** · May 9, 2003, 08:10

I have a fast connection, but the load time seems more dependent on Poly usage than my connection speed. So in that sense it can make sense not to have too many posts per page (so as to reduce Poly processing power).

**Robert** · May 9, 2003, 08:11

There IS a creative solution to set the posts per page on 100 / 1000 / whatever you want

But I'm not going to post that solution right here because Markos will ban me for 5 months if I do.
And after that Ming will explain to me for weeks that this is a private site and that the owners can do whatever they please and how I should respect that and how I disrespected their long and hard work for which they don't earn any money and stuff

Thus, I won't post that solution right here.

but my e-mail is robert@plompweb.net

Attached Files

**Ming** · May 9, 2003, 09:24

Originally posted by CyberShy
And after that Ming will explain to me for weeks that this is a private site and that the owners can do whatever they please and how I should respect that and how I disrespected their long and hard work for which they don't earn any money and stuff

Yeah... I probably would...

**Alex** · May 9, 2003, 11:22

I use the forum default, it suits me fine. I never bothered to count how many posts are in a page, so you could include me in the group of those who can't be arsed with that.

**Panag** · May 9, 2003, 14:19

Originally posted by Locutus
Panag,
That's why it's an option: you can already choose for 10, 15 or 25 posts per page, so the 'weak' are already covered. The strong are currently barely covered at all (I hardly regard 40 proper coverage). An extra option or 2 wouldn't hurt the 'weak' at all but be a great help to the 'strong'...

hi ,

yes , agreed , but what about download from the server , ....

if Mark or Dan did it they had a reason for it , ....

its not up to us to demand anything from them , afterall they own the site and they do almost anything that is possible to give us max use of it , .....

anyway , it could be this move that increased the page loading time , ......

have a nice day

**orange** · May 9, 2003, 16:09

ah, sorry Ming, didn't know this thread existed

They should definitely up the maximum to 50 or 100

**Ming** · May 9, 2003, 16:40

I would like to keep 50... and 100 would be even better

**Robert** · May 9, 2003, 18:00

Ming wants some 'creative solutions' as well

Oh, and don't tell Markos I told you,
he's eager to ban me.

And for everyone who uses my trick,
Markos has banned me once for 1 week because I used such a silly loophole for a good joke

That's why I didn't keep my number of replies on 100.
I'm scared to death for Markos the Merciless.

**Ben Kenobi** · May 9, 2003, 18:06

/me makes note to check user settings.

Markos, does it really save that much of a load?

**Straybow** · May 9, 2003, 19:30

I want 17¾ posts per page, 'coz it's my favorite number!

**Locutus** · May 9, 2003, 20:42

Originally posted by orange
ah, sorry Ming, didn't know this thread existed

Yeah, you can rely on me to choose unobscure thread titles that nobody notices

**Skanky Burns** · May 9, 2003, 23:47

Cyber

What fun we had, though.

**Robert** · May 10, 2003, 04:08

I want 17¾ posts per page, 'coz it's my favorite number!

It's all possible!!

Skanky: sure! I still laugh out loud how Markos banned us because he thought we had completely hacked his system

**BustaMike** · May 14, 2003, 17:58

At the Official ElderScrolls (Morrowind) Forums, there is a button after every multi page post (an all button) that displays the entire post. That would be a great thing to add.

**badams52** · May 14, 2003, 18:11

fast machine, large screen, 100 is about right. esp if you have to mod a forum

Announcement

Posts per page

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment