Dear Unregistered, the permission changes should be complete, if you notice any issues with your access on the site please let us know and we will check into it.
Hey Unregistered it seems that you haven't posted a message in our forums yet. Please join in on the fun and post a message!
Dear Unregistered,
We've noticed that you are not yet a member of our Cayman Insiders group. This group provides a number of additional value-add services via this website for a very low annual fee. You can find out more about this group here:
Insider Announcement
You can join the Cayman Insiders Group here:
Insider Enrollment Form
We hope to see you "Inside" soon!
Your Donation Will Be Used To Pay For our ever increasing bandwidth costs, our hosting Service, domain registration, software licensing fees, maintenance costs and product evaluations Only!
Please enter your donation amount above, and then click on the donate button below.
Sorry man...... Did you do the same thing with the pics? It was so much easier, but with the single long page, not ideal.
My thumbnails vary from 280 to 320 pixels wide, depending on how many pics I have in the FAQ. If I have a lot, I'll go down to 280 wide.
Before you go crazy, take a look at your pics and compare their actual size to your display size. If they are pretty close, the benefit won't be huge. In my case, some of my originals were 800x1200 and I was displaying them at 300x450 so there was a lot of waste there.
I use Front Page for my HTML work. Word will add all sorts of cascading style functions. The dream weaver took out all of that overhead (holy ****, I couldn't believe how much), but it kind of added a lot of line feeds. So I hope you don't mind that I massaged your work a little in Front Page.
Sorry man...... Did you do the same thing with the pics? It was so much easier, but with the single long page, not ideal.
My thumbnails vary from 280 to 320 pixels wide, depending on how many pics I have in the FAQ. If I have a lot, I'll go down to 280 wide.
Before you go crazy, take a look at your pics and compare their actual size to your display size. If they are pretty close, the benefit won't be huge. In my case, some of my originals were 800x1200 and I was displaying them at 300x450 so there was a lot of waste there.
I'm not going to touch them for now. I actually resized them all from the original down to 400/500.
OK, you are going to want to ban me for this, but I've just put about 2 hours into reformatting many of my FAQs. Not so much visibly, let me explain.
OK, when we started these, for the pictures I would point to the original picture (which is some case can be quite large) and for a thumbnail I would give the browser a set dimension to resize the image to. That means the browser needs to load the full picture and then resize it. Well, when you have a single uber long page with all the FAQs, that's a lot of loading and a lot of resizing which equals slow load times.
Anyway, I went back and looked at all of my FAQs in which I was pointing to super big files and having the browser resize. I then resized the pictures manually using a photo editor and loaded separate thumbnails to the article images folder. Then went back and re-pointed my FAQs to the new small images. This should make the page load noticeably faster.
The downside is this. Now we have lots of thumbnail size pics in the article images folder. And, K-Man S will love this part, we need to replace many of my FAQs with the updated version that points to the smaller faster loading images. The are:
Also on the plus side is the fact that the FAQs will look a little nicer too as I can better resize images than most browsers can.
This is not a top priority. They will continue to work as they are. But if you would like them to load faster and look a little nicer, go ahead and update the above FAQs.
OK I have replaced these items with the newer ones from your message. Let me know if all of them are correct
