Something bad with imagekerker User Offline 11.07.16 03:29:43 pm SORRY, NOW I KNOW WHAT`S BAD, ADD THIS TOPIC IN TRASH. I try to add image in signature. But it`s size 386x126 http://cs2d-slava.at.ua/01b3f60e1c7940e284a95a7cbb799889-1-.png Sorry, bad english.
Re: Something bad with imagePagyra User Offline 11.07.16 04:06:43 pm width 600 height100 width 386 height126
Re: Something bad with imageYates Reviewer Offline 11.07.16 04:15:02 pm The image tags should simply have a css max width and height and then the upload check wouldn't even be needed.
Re: Something bad with imageVADemon User Offline 11.07.16 07:42:43 pm @ Yates: Good idea! Here's how it will work: (don't click on the image unless you are Yates, you have been warned) Illustration, proof of work
Re: Something bad with imageYates Reviewer Offline 11.07.16 07:52:20 pm @ VADemon: Well of course there should be an actual limit, one that just isn't so bloody tiny. Pretty obvious, eh? (By the way that image didn't even take longer than two seconds to load ) edited 1×, last 11.07.16 07:54:17 pm
Re: Something bad with imageAvo User Offline 11.07.16 07:53:13 pm @ VADemon: you sick motherfucker. You made the point anyway.
Re: Something bad with imageNekomata User Offline 11.07.16 08:04:00 pm I guess you could now literally say curiosity killed the RAM. get it? curiosity the rover? clever pun? no? anyone? edited 1×, last 11.07.16 11:07:02 pm
Re: Something bad with imageSparty Reviewer Offline 12.07.16 04:22:32 am @ VADemon: Looking at that picture give me the chills..
Re: Something bad with imageAhmad User Offline 12.07.16 09:29:46 pm @ VADemon: chrome couldn't load it but ironically internet explorer did, I'd have tried firefox but i deleted it cuz it's become shitty