07-06-2015, 05:33 PM
(07-06-2015, 05:30 PM)Ehksidian Wrote:Then where is the line? Do images have to be bite sized thumbnails to not be "fuckhuge" or do they have to stretch the message they're embedded in excessively before they are banned.(07-06-2015, 05:27 PM)Surge Wrote: Long gifs I can understand. High resolution images so ridiculous they fuck with page formatting too, but smaller gifs and still images in general should not be considered an undue drain on any internet connection faster than AOL.
did you literally not read what i said
"Don't embed fuckhuge images"
that is word for word what i said
not "don't embed images ever".
I don't like the idea of "X content, although SFW, is now banned because Y and I say so"
http://ask.fm/Surge753
I answer questions. snark provided free of charge.
Most hated member of the nexus, irritation and/or ragequit guaranteed or your money back.
"IF I DO NOT RETURN INFORM MY HUMAN COHABITANTS THAT I FEEL STRONGLY FOR THEM"
I answer questions. snark provided free of charge.
Most hated member of the nexus, irritation and/or ragequit guaranteed or your money back.
"IF I DO NOT RETURN INFORM MY HUMAN COHABITANTS THAT I FEEL STRONGLY FOR THEM"