KotDB: Are you kiding. I can see it being usefull to have a minimal bandwidth option for those people on limited or pay per byte connections.

mctrivia: No, I'm not kiding. I'm not kidding, either. And for me, at least, it's nothing to do with bandwidth; I simply dislike being distracted by all the colors and animations and assorted mayhem from the exchange of ideas which is the purpose of the discussion boards.

KotDB: Buy a membership. Black rook is only 150 Euro for today only. Well it is 2 for 1 so you need to find someone to split it with.

KotDB: Do you use Firefox? With greasemonkey?

If so, you can use this greasemonkey script that replaces the smileys with their previous text representation.
Save the following in a file named "unfoistSmileys.user.js" and then open it in Firefox to install.

(function() {

unfoistSmileys();

function unfoistSmileys() {
  var b = document.getElementsByTagName('body');
  var r = /<img src="\/images\/smileys\/(\d+)\.gif">/g
  b[0].innerHTML = b[0].innerHTML.replace(r, "*$1*");
}

})();

hexkid: I don't use Firefox, but I think I could do something similar in Opera. Your suggestion is much better than the others I've heard. Still, I'm nearly certain that I'm not the only pawn who prefers not to be deluged by smileys, so I think it would be good for BK to provide the option of disabling them.

KotDB: Well, I know I repeat myself but it cannot make any harm. The cheapest membership is for 20 Euro a year. It means, uh, about 5 cents a day. Not much. Who doesn't like smileys and wants to use many other advantages of a paid membership, should be able to afford it.

Fencer: Thank you for the reply, which I take to mean that my feature request has been denied. Fair enough; it's your site.

Still, I find this change confusing. Yesterday, seeing smileys was a privilege reserved for paying members. Today, not seeing smileys is a privilege reserved for paying members. Why? This change affects only pawns, yet it was implemented suddenly at the request of a handful of rooks, and it remains undocumented here, here, and here.

To my knowledge the other advantages you refer to have not changed since yesterday. So if I have not yet purchased a paying membership, why would you expect me to do so now, simply for the right not to see smileys? There are easier and cheaper ways not to see smileys on BrainKing.

KotDB: No, I don't expect you to purchase anything. I've just followed a request of paying members which is, of course, more important than a complaint of non-paying members. That's how it works here.

Fencer: I realize that, and that's one of my reasons for not purchasing a membership.

KotDB:

KotDB: Sure, of course, it's your right. It wouldn't be wise to expect that everyone on this site would purchase a membership. It's not possible to create a site which is suitable for everybody.

KotDB:

I cant imagine that the smileys are such a problem unless your opponent is sending hundreds at a time during a game move.

I love'em and BK is the only turn based game site with these. (Added more recently ) TY

KotDB: when i am playing from work smileys can be bad as well .. a site with just text (when i am reading the boards) doesnt attract all attention ... smileys attract a bit more :)

(the games boards though attract most attention .. it would be nice to have them in text form as well ;))

KotDB: Still, I find this change confusing. Yesterday, seeing smileys was a privilege reserved for paying members. Today, not seeing smileys is a privilege reserved for paying members. Why? This change affects only pawns, yet it was implemented suddenly at the request of a handful of rooks.

Yes that's odd! That's really odd!
If the change has been suggested by Rooks as you say i find it somewhat ridiculous.... Why Rooks should care about what Pawns can see or not? It's simply none of their(our) business what Pawns should see or not.....
AND the only logical reason i can think of for what happened(Rooks requested that feature), is some Pawns to have requested from some of their Rook friends to say on this board this request because as Rooks will get more attention....



Fencer: I've just followed a request of paying members which is, of course, more important than a complaint of non-paying members.

Yes but don't you find it odd that Rooks request a feature that doesn't affect them at all but only affects Pawns?
For example if i and 8-9 more Rooks ask as a request that Pawns should see their page with negative colors then you should do it?
OK you would say this is not a logical request, but what i'm trying to say is that every request of a Rook that affects ONLY Pawns and not them is not logical! And can be explained only by a Pawn's intervention to the Rook to make the request since he will receive more attention....

Pythagoras: No, you are not right. If you write a smiley and the addressed person can see it or not, it affects you as well.
Anyway, it will remain as it is.

Fencer: .
.
.
Well OK.... Although i still insist that i don't think that Rooks would die if Pawns couldn't see their posted smileys immediately(i say immediately since Pawns could see the smileys simply going into this page and replacing instead of X the number of the smile---> http://brainking.com/images/smileys/X.gif)

Anyway it's your choice and although i don't agree i don't find it bad since Pawns always have the chance of migrating to the 1st and 8th row area....

Also it is always nice to show your superiority to Pawns by showing them a couple of smileys that they can only see but can't post!


2 questions: Can Pawns see the latest html code you added? Can Pawns see pictures of the persons in the discussion boards?

Pythagoras: the answer is yes, to both your questions.

KotDB: Why don't you just turn them off? That's what I did. It's in the setting part. Or has this whole discussion been because Pawn members don't have the option? You certainly have pointed out a contradiction. They used to be something for the paying members to "enjoy" and now the smileys are being used to annoy the non-paying members. How'd this sea change come about? I see no reason for there to not be a setting to switch them on or off for every memeber.

KotDB: there is also the option of changing your mind and deciding you like them and think they're colorful and cute and fun. i did that a year or two ago and there's been one more thing i can enjoy - and one less thing that annoys me - in the world ever since.

KotDB: If you get a paid membership, you can disable the smileys. but, who knows. Maybe Fencer will publish that option to pawns.