Just a friendly reminder. The use of "invisble text" in posts and signature files is NOT allowed on MousePad. For more information about this policy, please read this entry (http://mousepad.mouseplanet.com/showthread.php?p=396181#post396181) in the FAQ.

We understand that you can not go back and edit posts you have already made using invisible text. We are reminding you that you may not continue to use invisible text in new posts. And we are reminding you that you may not use invisible text in your signature files.

If your signature file currently includes invisible text, we are giving you until 5:00 pm (Pacific Daylight Time) tonight, May 17, to remove it. After that, the moderators will remove it when we find it, and you will receive a warning. We do have the ability to bar individual members from using the signature file feature, and we reserve the right to take that action if it becomes necessary.

Please PM a moderator with any questions.

AVP
- for the moderators

<whining>
Awww. But we were having fun!
</whining>

Seriously, I totally understand your reasoning here, and you won't get a complaint from me. Oh well.

In light of the ban on invisible text, which I understand the reasons for ... is it possible to consider turning off the 10-character posting minimum that the new version of VB has saddled us with?

I have used invisible text primarily* for the purpose of defeating this function in the event that I have a post that consists of less than 10 characters. As you might imagine, this is a rare occurrence for me ... and I am more likely to violate a function that prohibits posts of more than ten paragraphs!

* I did have one post in the Lemon Chiffon thread.


But every once in a while, it becomes desirable to post a short and sweet response. I don't recall there being any problems that arose from the previous ability for people to post very brief responses.

In fact, I'm fairly sure that the whole thing with certain posters using invisible text was derived from the search for a solution to the new 10-character post minimum.


If the posting of three invisible periods after my extremely rare seven-character post is going to get me booted off MousePad, I would really appreciate it if the admins could look into disabling the 10-character minimum function.

I was just coming here to post the exact same thing that ISM just posted.

So consider this a STRONG second to that. I have been using Lemon Chiffon for those "short but sweet" posts.

In light of the ban on invisible text, which I understand the reasons for ... is it possible to consider turning off the 10-character posting minimum that the new version of VB has saddled us with?

I've been bitten by the minimum post length as well, but have discovered that pretty much any characters qualify, except spaces. So, for a short-and-sweet post, just pad it out with a line of periods or similarly innocuous characters.


..........

pretty much any characters qualify, except spaces...
...and VB code, and anything inside quotes.

In light of the ban on invisible text, which I understand the reasons for ... is it possible to consider turning off the 10-character posting minimum that the new version of VB has saddled us with?It's possible to consider it. It's not possible to change it.

And if padding short posts with added characters to get them over the 10-character rule had been the only used of the invisible text trick, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

AVP

Oh, bummer.


And yeah, frankly, I'm really ticked at some of my friends for taking what we communicated to them as an innocent means of posting very brief posts, and making of it some invisible text device that was inevitably going to come up against moderating difficulties.


Well, folks - if you see a really short, one word or single smiley post of mine followed by a string of periods or dashes, you'll know why.

Well, folks - if you see a really short, one word or single smiley post of mine followed by a string of periods or dashes, you'll know why.Back in the days of Usenet, we used to call this the AOL or newbie "Me, too" syndrome.

...and VB code, and anything inside quotes..

Neither of those is true I tried just quoting you and click "Post". Too short.
I added 31 characters worth of VB coding (plus a period) - still too short (click quote to see these characters).

.

Neither of those is true I tried just quoting you and click "Post". Too short.
I added 31 characters worth of VB coding (plus a period) - still too short (click quote to see these characters).That's what he was saying...he was adding to the "except"

That's what he was saying...he was adding to the "except"Oh, I misread... I thought he was saying, "except you can also do these things."

This probably is a silly question, but isn't there some way that you could just remove the "lemon chiffon" font color from the list of choices?

-Jeff

No, color is an all or nothing option. Even if we remove it from the list, it will still be available.

So, basically we are facing a simple choice - allow colors or remove them. I'll leave it to you all to follow the logic...

Well, then how about - and I know this will be sacrilige to some - changing the basic background color of the Pad so that none of the available colors will be verbotin.

I know that's drastic, but I would hope the admins would at least look at the contradiction in logic that says that use of an available color is a punishable offense.

Those on the Pad right now may become aware of it, but it is hardly going to be a common knowledge thing for new members, and I don't imagine it ever being one of the prominent guidelines that new members become aware of. Even if there were to be some continuing "education" on the matter, the distorted logic of the punishable available color is going to eventually rip a hole in the space-time continuum.


Not that it's a problem for me ... I can resist the urge to select Lemon Chiffon as a color. (By the way, is White prohibited as well?). I guess this puts the admins between a rock and hard place ... either having to scan posts for invisibility issues or having to run a board where a color or colors which remain available are punishible if used.

No matter what color scheme we're went with, with more than 20 color options one of them is going to likely be close enough to essentially achieve the same affect.

So, I'm happy with the general rule of "don't hide text". Now, there is no reason you'd ever need to use lemon chiffon since it renders your text completely invisible.

If you use other colors that are hard to read but have a fair enough reason for it, we're fine. If we feel you're doing it to hide your text, then we're less fine.

Yes, it has some element of subjectivity to it, but I'm completely comfortable with ruling capriciously and on whim.

Well, then ... is it ok if I use White to add a few dots to my ultra ultra rare under-10-character post (I was using the barely visible White before someone turned me on to the practically invisible Lemon Chiffon)?

This would not be a case of trying to hide text, but it would be an attempt to get around the 10-character minimum.

Kosher or not?

Can we PM using the invisible text? :confused:
If not, what about PMing to ourself? :)

What about finding all instances in the script where it says something like "post >10" and remove the 0?



Or, if you post in the vB forums, someone may have found a patch for it.


That would solve the problem, no?

No matter what color scheme we're went with, with more than 20 color options one of them is going to likely be close enough to essentially achieve the same affect.

So, I'm happy with the general rule of "don't hide text". Now, there is no reason you'd ever need to use lemon chiffon since it renders your text completely invisible.

If you use other colors that are hard to read but have a fair enough reason for it, we're fine. If we feel you're doing it to hide your text, then we're less fine.

Yes, it has some element of subjectivity to it, but I'm completely comfortable with ruling capriciously and on whim.


I know that this is totally off topic but Alex, is there a picture of you anywhere on the pad? I only ask because when I read some of your posts, I can't help but imagine the head fairy from The Fairly Odd Parents.

What about finding all instances in the script where it says something like "post >10" and remove the 0?

Or, if you post in the vB forums, someone may have found a patch for it.

That would solve the problem, no? Yes, there are probably ways to remove the minimum character count requirement, but we don't hack the vB system any more than absolutely necessary. Why? Because then we'd have to re-hack each new upgrade, and we just don't want to go down that road.

As for removing *just* lemon chiffon, the reality is that would only work if we keep this template. When we introduce new templates, we'd need to remove the new background color from the list of available colors for that template. Even IF we could, which we can't, it's another hack that we'd need to maintain.

We are not banning the use of lemon chiffon. We're banning the use of invisible text. That covers all of the templates, and all of the potentially invisible colors.

AVP

This allows members to write hidden text that only becomes visible when the text is selected with the left mouse button.

This practice is strictly prohibited. Use of this trick to bypass moderation will result in a private warning from a moderator. Ignoring this warning, and/or continued use of this trick, may result in disciplinary action.

Use of this trick to post text that, if visible, would violate our community guides, will immediately be subject to disciplinary action by the moderators (for example, using swear words, attacking other members, attacking other Web sites, threatening others, posting items for sale, and so on).To my ignorant and deficient brain, that reads like you're prohibiting the use of invisotext when the words thus hidden violate Community Policy—which I fully understand and support. What I don't understand is why writing hidden innocuous messages is a problem. E.g., if I have an invisible line in my .sig that indicates I like cheddar cheese, why is that an issue?

To my ignorant and deficient brain, that reads like you're prohibiting the use of invisotext when the words thus hidden violate Community Policy—which I fully understand and support. What I don't understand is why writing hidden innocuous messages is a problem. E.g., if I have an invisible line in my .sig that indicates I like cheddar cheese, why is that an issue?Because it leads to a moderating nightmare of constantly being on the lookout for hidden text. Of course, since it's common knowledge that it's possible, then they still have to, but by putting it in the rules, it cuts down on the likelihood of people using hidden text, thus cuts down on the effort it takes to police it.

To my ignorant and deficient brain, that reads like you're prohibiting the use of invisotext when the words thus hidden violate Community Policy—which I fully understand and support. What I don't understand is why writing hidden innocuous messages is a problem. E.g., if I have an invisible line in my .sig that indicates I like cheddar cheese, why is that an issue?Why are you ashamed that you like cheddar cheese? It's ok - you don't have to hide it! :D

Seriously, here's the best answer I can give: it's too hard to monitor.

Unless you go to the work to highlight the text of every .sig, you don't know what's in there. The moderators don't have the time. The other members don't have the inclination. Someone else asked me about this, and I pointed them to a particular .sig that had hidden text. Nobody else had noticed it, but there it was.

How can you (the MousePad membership) be self-policing if you can't see what's going on? How can the moderators do our job when we need to search for "hidden" text. Too much work. Too much hassle. And frankly, why HIDE something on a message board? If you don't want it read, don't post it.

AVP

So I'm the only one who almost exclusively uses and likes just black text on a neutral background?