EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
The idea of a wiki is interesting, but it is not an available feature of PHPBB3. Creating a wiki would involve setting up an entirely different piece of software online. An idea to consider for the future!
As far as a Wiki goes, I'll link you to an investing-for-retirement site that I follow: Bogleheads.
It's a phpBB site and they have a Wiki section there, also.
Would it be possible to set up something similar here at some point down the road?
How about the ability for us to share pictures (from personal uploads, not previously hosted images...)?
From my understanding, this would require the site's user settings to allow attachments:
https://www.phpbb.com/support/docs/en/3 ... _settings/
I'm a big fan of black-and-red graphics, which have a distinguished history . . .
Rock on---and thanks, guys.
Is there another means of illustrating the discussion, on a forum like this one ?
Perhaps this would be a good time and place to ask again whether the " Notify me when a reply is posted" function will be restored. Is any reader receiving an email each time a Wright Chat thread they are contributing to sees activity---as was the case before the site was updated ?
This would both be expedient for users and just nice to have, but also would allow WC to archive its own contributions of images from users over the years.
One only has to search an old Wright Chat thread to see many photos hosted by PhotoBucket or some other service which is now a dead link/image.
I got lucky, for once, by stumbling long ago onto a web host (granted, one that charges a nominal monthly fee) which so far has proved to be more than worth its weight: image files of any size, taken on board from my computer with little fuss, ready to spread across the digital galaxy at virtually a moment's notice.
It is, unfortunately, a burden to whoever hosts a forum like this one, to be asked to host images as well; that isn't a cost-free addition to the operating expense of a site such as ours. Perhaps if more of us supported the Conservancy in ways tangible (as I have only lately done, joining after years of freeloading for my pleasure at Wright Chat), then they could at least contemplate adding an unknown expense to the balance sheet ?
As I already have the service that I need, and find no bottom so far to the well into which I continue to deposit (ever-larger) files of images, I have long offered to post for other readers when they wish to have something appear on these pages. More than one Usonian owner has gifted me with hundreds of personal photos of their property, so that their work could be illustrated here for the edification of the community. And I have been very pleased to be able to offer that assistance, at the cost to me only of a little labor at the keyboard.
And so I offer you as well this little service, whenever you might need it. Think of it as a way to spare the Conservancy, our tireless hosts, a financial burden to be placed on top of the administrative duties they have graciously taken on, on behalf of the Wright community.
I suppose the cost of server storage to allow photo uploads might be an issue for the Conservancy. If that is the case, I hope they let us know. I'd support their determination of where their funds are best spent.
The ability to simply upload a personal photo to the Chat would be a feature, I believe, many would appreciate. When we've discussed the Chat in regards to Stan' Facebook Wright group, one complaint always is the inability to post photos here at the Chat. As I'm not a fan of Facebook the Company itself, I'd love to see more interactiveness from a wider net of Wright fans here on the Chat, and direct photo sharing might really help with that.
My purpose is not to blow my own horn, but to explain why it might be unrealisitic to expect our hosts at Wright Chat to take on the hosting of images. Users will note that other sites behave similarly in many cases, either not offering image hosting or limiting the number and/or sizes of images posted. One can assume that there are reasons for this. We can't forget that this site is a free service for members and casual readers/posters alike . . . with no advertising or data mining, unlike facebook !
---but it seems to me that the study of architectural photos and (especially) drawings requires intimate viewing, at as large a size as can be managed or offered.
My own posting of images here shows ever-larger images with the passage of time. Many of my earlier posts contain images no larger than 600 x 800 pixels, a size set by me at the time of upload to my web host (Yahoo Small Business Web Host), while in recent months they have grown past 15 or 16 hundred p (the maximum width visible without scrolling on the former WC format---on a 22" monitor). With the current layout and functionality, here, images posted are limited onscreen to c. 1200 p, but the reader is reminded that images can be opened in a new tab on the user's computer, whereupon the image is visible as the full size of my upload. I now upload drawing images at c. 2000 p. I have uncounted thousands of architectural images now, on my iPhoto libraries and at the web host.
(The web host claims that images uploaded with the same title as ones already on file will replace the older image---but this stopped happening a long time ago, so every time I wish to upload a given image at a larger size or different editing, I have to retitle it or it won't upload---so there is a growing cohort of redundant images in the file manager. Seems like an unfortunate waste of storage space, but the company doesn't respond to notice of that apparent defect, nor does it charge more for this unnecessary luxury/inconvenience.)