"big", "old" and "other".

("big" as in "big pictures are hard to view and slow to load", "old" as in "it's been posted here before" and "other" because a list like that needs that alternative)

Then some kind of option to choose not to see pictures of certain categories...

We already have a 'other' category, 'Misc'. A duplicate category has been added. Also we'll be looking into scaling images, that are 'too big', in the future.

Big images can be fine, if you specifically want a monitor background or something to print out. Scaling down might ruin some pictures (say, you are a fan of some specific car and you find a nice "poster size" picture of that car here...). I just mean there could be some kind of warning (on the thumbnail or something) so that people could avoid those images if they want to.

Also, I tried spending an hour with "random image" and "categorise", and one thing that I found a problem was when there was a picture of a building (there were several such pictures). They just didn't fit into any of the categories. Maybe "vehicles" could be "technology" and include pictures of houses, computers, phones... (i.e. a wider category)

I also put some pictures in more than one category. How is that treated "behind the surface"?

How does the category thing work? I keep categorizing images, but it always shows "category: none yet".

And how many votes does it take for the
"Users also liked:" to show something?

Another intepretation of "old": "outdated" (e.g. Bush vs. Kerry jokes...)

Another category: "political" (could include Bush jokes, racism, etc.)

And one more before I go to bed: a category for flagging "unsuitable material" (e.g. the cartoons somebody had copied from another site earlier today, or illegal pictures, ...). But what to call it? "report"?

199228: You can only put a image into 1 category, if you change your mind and put it in another, your old 'vote' is updated to show the different category you put it into. I'm still not that keen on the old category, however i have added a Political category. Also for things like building i'd put that into landscape.

MAILERDAEMON: For a image to have related images it's kinda complex. People who vote for it (with 3 or more stars), need to vote for at least 15 other images (in total, so it could be 3 users voting on 5 images each) and give them a rating of 3 or more stars, however even then due to the stats behind how its worked out that doesn't mean it will be able to find enough votes to work it out. As for categories a image needs at least 5 votes of the same category to be put into a category, these votes also need to come from 5 different people, HOWEVER to make things work nicer in the gallery images will appear in a category with 1 vote, i'm going to change this and require 5 once categories pickup more.

Is it only me? In a _category_ gallery I cannot switch to next page (or second and so on). It switches back to "normal" gallery. Please help!

woops.. just a bug mailerdaemon, all fixed now.. =)

On another note: I've changed the images to scale (within the html) so we should now not have to scroll across the page to see super large images, i'm keeping the source image the same size however so loading times on super large images that are uploaded wont be improved. Maybe it's time you upgraded your internet connection if images are taking too long

Adding width and height to the images is a good idea. It's speeded up the "loading" of the html ("loading" isn't just about bits and bytes travelling around the earth on wires, it's also about "drawing" the page in the browser). :-)

Maybe there could be some little indicator thingy when one gets to a picture that has been set to show as smaller than its real size?

The "political" category doesn't seem to have travelled all the way from your head into the actual program... (?)

(grumble) (grumble) (one image often fits into more than one category) (grumble) :-\

Most of the naked ladies do not fit into "erotic", IMO. I'm putting them under "stupid". :-P

Hahaha 199228: it appears your right. Dunno how that happened. I was sure i did that before i posted here. Oh well.. "political" has been added..

"Maybe there could be some little indicator thingy when one gets to a picture that has been set to show as smaller than its real size?"

Something like on Google's image search: a message that says "Image has been scaled down. _See_full-size_image_."

Then there's the question of order. So far it seems that you have just put every new idea in at the end.

You could use separators to create small groups of "similar" categories. Also, "misc" should be at the end (that's why I asked for an "other" category - I missed the "misc" category in all the mess!). "Duplicate" isn't really a "real" category either...

Something like this:

humor
political
erotic
disgusting
weird
stupid
------
people
animals
vehicles
sport
geek/computer
------
landscape
art/culture
science
------
misc
duplicate

Maybe "science" isn't the word I was looking for... I mean things like space pictures, visual illusions, sirds, that "how many people are in the picture" animation, fractals, ...

things of a more mathematical/"IQ" interest...

"science/IQ" maybe?

Science/IQ would fall under geek.. I don't want to add too many categories as it'll just complex things for the users.. grouping is a good idea however and i should get around to doing that soon.. the order of the categories atm is set to when they where added, so yes when new categories are added they will appear at the end.. i agree with you this is prob a bad idea.. but hey i'm lazy..

I don't like the word "geek". It's like "nigger", only aimed at a different group, and it usually implies the *opposite* of intelligence!

I consider myself a geek and when im called such think it's a cool thing..

Hahahaha..

Yeah, I actually tend to agree with DarkKlown on this one

The thing I've heard poeple call themselves is "nerd". You could say that's the opposite of "geek" (a positive word that means a person is good at something, instead of a negative word used by bullies).

[jargon.watson-net.com]

"an asocial, malodorous, pasty-faced monomaniac with all the personality of a cheese grater. This is often still the way geeks are regarded by non-geeks"

[jargon.watson-net.com]

"Term of praise applied (in conscious ironic reference to sense 1) to someone who knows what's really important and interesting and doesn't care to be distracted by trivial chatter and silly status games."

(yes, I know those are just small quotes, part of longer pages, but as usual when one tries to find a good example all good examples have gone into hiding!)

So, here's the opposite of my last post:

[jargon.watson-net.com]

"Pejorative applied to anyone with an above-average IQ and few gifts at small talk and ordinary social rituals."

(note: "applied to" *by others*!)

[jargon.watson-net.com]

"A person who has chosen concentration rather than conformity; one who pursues skill (especially technical skill) and imagination, not mainstream social acceptance"

and:

"Originally, a geek was a carnival performer who bit the heads off chickens."

(I still say that nerd is a positive word and geek is a negative word)

Un-random suggestion:

Allow people to set a filter in their user account info to limit which categories they will see images from under 'normal' circumstances. E.g. someone like me that doesn't want to be inundated by mediocre porn and dismembered bodies unless I'm specifically in that mood.

( and now that posts have formatting, adding a preview would be cool

Cheetah: Yah i'm going to add that, however it requires a fair amount of code to do right, i'm just finishing some other features and will be getting onto that then.