Welcome to the new CricketWeb Forums

[James]

We play these draft games where we post progress by repeatedly editing the update post. If we can edit only up to 5 minutes then we might end up spamming with updates every few minutes.

Makes sense - let's see what others think too and we can take it from there. Thanks for your feedback.

 

[James]

Thanks for all the feedback today everyone, both positive and negative. It's appreciated.

Keep it coming too, so we can improve the experience for all.

 

[Starfighter]

Makes sense - let's see what others think too and we can take it from there. Thanks for your feedback.

Yep that's about right, 675 pages.

Good number is 675, might buy myself a Daytona one day.

 

[vcs]

Avatars have been removed from alongside threads - let me know thoughts.

Note: you may need to do a hard refresh within your browser for it to take affect.

Awesome, much better

 

[trundler]

More posts per page and a longer duration to edit posts will be swell, thanks

 

[vcs]

James, can we try out some Xenforo theme that reduces the wasted space on both sides of the page layout? Also, dark blue page background (same shade as the old one used to be) instead of grey would be awesome, it would clearly delineate the gaps between posts. Thanks.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah 24 hours for edit and maybe 20-30 (I guess 25 the middle ground) posts per page seems nice.

 

[vcs]

We could try out a few different fonts as well.

Georgia seems to be the best, can we make it default?

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

I prefer the look now avatars have been removed from alongside threads.


Personally I would be happy if posts could be edited up to a week after posting, but I'll be honest I'm mostly thinking it would be handy for updating the OPs on Mafia game threads rather than general use.

...ok I'm also the sort of person who gets annoyed when I see punctuation errors in my own posts after the fact and can't correct them.

 

[weeman27bob]

40 posts per page is definitely best. (If not more)

 

[harsh.ag]

The higher posts per page should be optional, just like in the old skin.

 

[vcs]

On my 1920x1280 resolution screen, there is a lot of wasted space on both sides.



On my MacBook Air (which won't tell me the bloody resolution), there is much less wasted space.



Using Firefox in both cases.

 

[ankitj]

The higher posts per page should be optional, just like in the old skin.

I think it should be fixed. So when someone says page #3, we all know what they mean.

 

[harsh.ag]

Nah, I like fewer posts per page. 40 is way too high for me. 15 was great.

 

[harsh.ag]

On my 1920x1280 resolution screen, there is a lot of wasted space on both sides.

View attachment 25563

Not happening on mine. Same resolution. Chrome.

Have you tried zooming?

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Not happening on mine. Same resolution. Chrome.

Have you tried zooming?

you must be zoomed at 150% somewhere because the page is designed not be wider than 1200px.

Whether that's a good idea or not i dunno, personally I'd leave the navigation sections as they are but widen the body section (containing posts and content) to fill the screen

 

[harsh.ag]

110% zoom in Chrome for me. Perfect.

 

[sledger]

How can one see their infraction points?

 

[ankitj]

Nah, I like fewer posts per page. 40 is way too high for me. 15 was great.

Then I'd say leave it at 20. Everyone being on same page (what a smooth pun!) will be good.

 

[Gnske]

I think I hate this.