The Gif Rule

[WHO]

Can the gif's have to be in spoilers rule be removed?

Honestly if someone can't handle gifs because of epilepsy~ they don't even need to be on a forum discussing an animated game? And you can block gifs on certain browsers with extensions.

Of course there should be a rule about flashing gifs imitating strobe lights. But I'm talking about normal moving gifs that don't move any faster than the game. lol

 

[Goddess]

Yes please.

 

[Jerimiah]

Spoilers aren't just for those prone to seizures but gifs can cause the page to load slow so putting them in spoilers is more of an efficiency thing. Many forums have the same rule.

 

[Aka]

Didn't know about this until now

 

[Dragon]

Spoilers aren't just for those prone to seizures but gifs can cause the page to load slow so putting them in spoilers is more of an efficiency thing. Many forums have the same rule.

The gifs still load even if they're in spoilers...

 

[Hipstahh]

Spoilers aren't just for those prone to seizures but gifs can cause the page to load slow so putting them in spoilers is more of an efficiency thing. Many forums have the same rule.

The gifs still load even if they're in spoilers...

...he was talking about the loading time

 

[Dragon]

Spoilers aren't just for those prone to seizures but gifs can cause the page to load slow so putting them in spoilers is more of an efficiency thing. Many forums have the same rule.

The gifs still load even if they're in spoilers...

...he was talking about the loading time

If a gif is causing a page to load slow, and you put it in a spoiler, it's still going to cause the page to load slow...

 

[Whispered]

Dragon is right, the whole page loads when you click it, regardless of something being in a spoiler or not.

 

[Chill]

Amen to this.

 

[aceastrofan]

That would be nice. I don't know if my sig GIF causes any issues, but I don't think that a spoiler tag is necessary for it.

 

[Goddess]

Yeah Dragon is right, like other people have already stated, loading time for a page with a gif on it doesn't matter whether it's spoilerized or not, the loading time is the same. I haven't heard of any other forums incorporating this rule, and if you think it's because of slow page loading and that somehow enforcing a rule to spoiler the gif helps, you're not very well informed.

That would be nice. I don't know if my sig GIF causes any issues, but I don't think that a spoiler tag is necessary for it.

Also, there isn't a rule against gifs being spoilerized in signatures, which basically contradicts the entire rule against gifs being allowed in posts. If you have a gif in your signature and that doesn't have to be spoilerized, why would the gif in your post have to? If this was really about epilepsy, that rule would have applied to signatures as well.

It honestly always seemed like a last stitch effort for whatever issue was being reported and it didn't seem well thought out. Honestly, there's no good reason for it so why should it stay? It was only applied within the past 2 or 3 months, before that there wasn't a problem with gifs so what happened?

 

[TheLittleMermaid]

There might be people with epilepsy who want to enjoy this forum too but honestly the internet is full of gifs they should take caution upon coming on it. Has anyone even came forward saying they have epilepsy?

 

[Goddess]

There might be people with epilepsy who want to enjoy this forum too but honestly the internet is full of gifs they should take caution upon coming on it. Has anyone even came forward saying they have epilepsy?

Not publicly at least (to my knowledge). Can we get a Moderator to comment perhaps? [MENTION=858]Halcyon[/MENTION] [MENTION=86]Silhouette[/MENTION]

Sil mentioned some time ago that she was attempting to get the gif rule retracted but that obviously didn't go through.

 

[ChristinaMarie]

The reason it doesn't apply to signatures is because I believe there's an option to turn off all signatures, so if someone wanted, they wouldn't have to deal with that.

But I agree, it'd be nice to get rid of the rule since anyone on the forums (or in the game) should be cautious of the moving images anyway. And as others have already stated, it doesn't affect the page loading time.

 

[Goddess]

The reason it doesn't apply to signatures is because I believe there's an option to turn off all signatures, so if someone wanted, they wouldn't have to deal with that.

But I agree, it'd be nice to get rid of the rule since anyone on the forums (or in the game) should be cautious of the moving images anyway. And as others have already stated, it doesn't affect the page loading time.

Was that option added to settings? I know the one you're talking about but I no longer see it.

 

[CurleeQ]

Thanks everyone for your feedback!

I believe someone did request this feature and if adding a spoiler tag makes someone's experience more enjoyable... I believe it is worth it.

The reason it does not apply to signatures is because you have the option to turn signatures off. This can be done by doing the following: User CP> Settings and Options > Edit Options> uncheck show signatures.

Hope this clears some things up!

 

[Whispered]

Yeah Dragon is right, like other people have already stated, loading time for a page with a gif on it doesn't matter whether it's spoilerized or not, the loading time is the same. I haven't heard of any other forums incorporating this rule, and if you think it's because of slow page loading and that somehow enforcing a rule to spoiler the gif helps, you're not very well informed.

That would be nice. I don't know if my sig GIF causes any issues, but I don't think that a spoiler tag is necessary for it.

Also, there isn't a rule against gifs being spoilerized in signatures, which basically contradicts the entire rule against gifs being allowed in posts. If you have a gif in your signature and that doesn't have to be spoilerized, why would the gif in your post have to? If this was really about epilepsy, that rule would have applied to signatures as well.

It honestly always seemed like a last stitch effort for whatever issue was being reported and it didn't seem well thought out. Honestly, there's no good reason for it so why should it stay? It was only applied within the past 2 or 3 months, before that there wasn't a problem with gifs so what happened?

The rule was frantically put in place by a certain staff member very quickly with no warning or community discussion (I won't believe the "we all talked about it" thing), and then changed about 3 times within 24 hours, then it hasn't been changed since. They also shut down any discussion about the rule - even when such discussion was giving them valuable feedback (such as load times not being improved by spoilers, how epilepsy actually works, etc.).

Very great modding</sarcasm> (not you CurleeQ, congrats btw :P)

 

[Oreo]

Thanks everyone for your feedback!

I believe someone did request this feature and if adding a spoiler tag makes someone's experience more enjoyable... I believe it is worth it.

The reason it does not apply to signatures is because you have the option to turn signatures off. This can be done by doing the following: User CP> Settings and Options > Edit Options> uncheck show signatures.

Hope this clears some things up!

Many thanks to you for providing a response (: But, if it's worth it for one member, isn't it worth changing for the members now requesting the rule be reversed? o:

 

[CurleeQ]

Thanks everyone for your feedback!

I believe someone did request this feature and if adding a spoiler tag makes someone's experience more enjoyable... I believe it is worth it.

The reason it does not apply to signatures is because you have the option to turn signatures off. This can be done by doing the following: User CP> Settings and Options > Edit Options> uncheck show signatures.

Hope this clears some things up!

Many thanks to you for providing a response (: But, if it's worth it for one member, isn't it worth changing for the members now requesting the rule be reversed? o:

I will bring this thread to the other moderator's attention but for the now the rule will stay. Reversing the rule would be disrespectful towards someone's disability. The alternative would be to eliminate Gifs completely .

 

[Oreo]

I will bring this thread to the other moderator's attention but for the now the rule will stay. Reversing the rule would be disrespectful towards someone's disability. The alternative would be to eliminate Gifs completely .

Sounds great. Thank you for your response!