Why does it take so long to approve pictures? Geezer has some more pictures from the Z convention that look like they were uploaded on Thursday, but still haven't been approved (as of Saturday afternoon).

Is there any way to add more people as picture approvers so that they can be viewed faster? I would volunteer to be one, if I am worthy.

-Mike

Mike, you can HAVE the job as far as I'm concerned.

Why they didn't "take", I don't know, but there ARE other moderators and super-moderators and administrators all with more "rights" than I who apparently missed those pictures also.

Trying to determine why they "took so long", the picture gallery's time is off by a chunk... at October 4, 2008, 3:49 pm it reads it as October 3, 2008, 11:49 pm so it is essentially 16 hours BEHIND Pacific time.

The last 3 times pictures were "moderated" (what a joke, they're visible from the start) were:

October 3, 2008, 11:47 pm = Just a bit ago

October 2, 2008, 6:59 am = 10/2 at 10:59 pm

September 30, 2008, 9:22 pm = 10/1 at 1:22 pm

So his photos must have been uploaded after 11pm on 10/2.

Comments were also "moderated" (another joke, they can get commented ON) at that time.

So, let Mike know you're interested, and I'll back off, (or get removed) and you can appreciate the futility and comments that will arise.

As the song goes....

E

I don't see the point of image moderation when anyone can attach any image they want to a post without moderation. Perhaps there could be a compromise if the software supports it. I'd have no problem automatically accepting images from anyone who's been a member for more than a certain length of time and/or has had x number of posts.

E,

Sorry, I didn't intend to offend you or anyone else. Just looking for some insight into what the approval process is, and to offer myself as an additional approver if that would help. I still don't really know how the process works, but wouldn't it be better to have lots of people set up to approve pictures so that there is only a minimal wait time? I agree that there is not much benefit to having gallery pictures go through an approval process since people can post directly to a thread with no approval.

-Mike

Why does it take so long to approve pictures?

Wrong question, IMHO. Not that there aren't good questions to be asked about this process. Such as:

• Why DO pictures need to be approved?
• If we do need to have them be approved, why are the thumbnails visible prior to approval?
• Why can't the system notify the moderators when there is something awaiting approval?
• Why doesn't the primary approver have the ability to perform necessary tasks, such as re-name folders?
• And what's the deal with the 'moderation' of comments?

Now I will stipulate that someone needs to ride herd on the organization of the photo gallery. If we just let every one post where ever and how ever they like, before long no one will be able to find anything. But it's a thankless job. The only time Enrique hears about his work is when someone complains about the approval delay. I, for one, think he does quite well getting to this, considering that he persists in having a life outside of CZCC.

Besides Enrique, the only other people who have the permissions to muck about in the Gallery are myself and Mike. (Well, technically Victor as well, but I don't know that he visits regularly enough these days to be of help on this.) And I have been reluctant to jump in, as I don't know what really goes on there, and haven't wanted to step on any toes.

I guess the reality is that the only person who can answer these questions is Mike.

Bump:

I can't change the name on the folder for the latest uploaded pics.

Sorry

Hi guys,

I looked into adding some more rights for the moderators in the gallery. But, it looks like I'm stuck w/out going through about 80 hours of work. I'm looking into giving the moderators access rights to modifying folder names (and adding new ones). This is a design change to our existing software but I have some ideas how we can work around it.

The idea behind approving the photos is to assure they are put into the correct category. I've seen a lot of people uploading photos into their root gallery but never giving them a category. It gives us a better system if we can keep them categorized.

Unfortunately I cannot disable the ability to upload w/out a category, so, this is the best way (that I can see) to keep categories sorted out. If we didn't have categories the gallery would turn into a HUGE un-sorted database... Think of it as putting all of your family photos into a huge box and never sorting through them. It's fun to spend a few hours going through them, but, you'll never see things organized. By doing this, we can at least try to keep things organized in there.

I can remove the approval process if you guys feel it won't get too generalized. I dunno, I'm just the programmer...

m

Mike, you can HAVE the job as far as I'm concerned.

I have had this job for over 12 years. I'm not sure how to make you feel better about this system but think of it as a continuously morphing process. It's far from perfect and the simplest way to make things happen is to simply bring up ideas and implement them into the system.

Thanks for all your help guys.

Mike

Mike, wasn't referring to you, I was referring to Mike B.

I try to log on a couple of times a day, but sometimes life gets in the way.

FWIW

E

Go to photobucket.com open an account, upload your photos then copy and post them here like this. The photo bucket account if free and it's easy because it puts the image tag line line (

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h167/twin_z_dad/Midwest%20Z%20fest%2008/100_5295.jpg' alt='100_5295.jpg'>

Edited October 14, 200816 yr by nwa240z

Go to photobucket.com open an account, upload your photos then copy and post them here like this. The photo bucket account if free and it's easy because it puts the image tag line line () in there for you and copies it for you when you click on it from your account.

Great idea. I've tried it, but, there is a problem with using remote image hosing services. Since the images aren't stored in our database, something can happen to the images and we'll will be left with a lot of dead links. You'll see this in many of the forums. Short term it works great, just the long term it can be a problem. We've been here over 12 years and I've seen a lot of services come and go (bought out, changed URL's, closed shop, etc).

m

As someone who makes a living administering Internet-facing systems, I have to agree with Mike on this one. The only way to guarantee that an image will be available EVERY time a page is loaded is to host the image on the same server that's displaying the page. Any other method is a crapshoot. It may work most of the time, but some day, some time it will fail.

I totally understand the idealology behind the hosting/dead image links but photobucket has been around for quite some time and feel that it is a safe idea in my opinoin. If it's a tech write up with valuable picture links, host here. If it's just another car show well you get my point. Is the above image one that somebody is going to treasure for years to come? Proabably not. If I'm in a hurry trying to reply to somebody with a picture of what they are looking for, well again quick and easy for a win-win.

I think the real issue of dead links is that there are so many copy and paste folks out there (I've done it myself) they grab a pic off the net, post it and months later it's gone. If you manage your account (I manage my photo bucket account) then your original links won't disappear.

Again, I understand the idea of hosting the pics here on classiczcars, I was asked to do so when I first bought the Scarab, I did not do it and my onclickpix account (which I paid for) went A-W-A-Y. Poof gone. Yeah that sucked, luckliy I have all the original pics but they no longer are on my posts. I'm easy enough to find though if anybody needs Scarab information or pictures.

David

Edited October 14, 200816 yr by nwa240z