|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jul 31, 2020 18:20:46 GMT
AdminSTB has confirmed that be because we're at the storage limit for images on the forum, the function is only available for moderators. I saw that message earlier, but I wasn't sure what exactly what it meant. Does it mean that we can't do a thing which has (img)something(/img) (except with sqaure brackets)? Or does it mean we can't do links to youtube stuff etc? I used to use tinypic but that is defunct now. To clarify, if the image is hosted externally then it should be fine. ProBoards provides an attachment facility for posts in which images and other files are hosted on the ProBoards servers, and what has happened is that we're at 90% of our storage limit. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jul 31, 2020 18:27:37 GMT
[Unfortunately this also means you have to create two cross-county Staffordshire/West Midlands constituencies instead of one, The West Midlands County Council has not existed since 1986, after only existing for 12 years. Wolverhampton and most of the Black Country has been part of Staffordshire for far longer than that unpopular temporary blip of the worst PM of the 20th century's made-up counties. If we can cope with Stoke being in Staffordshire, despite unitary local government, then we can similarly cope with Wolverhampton being a unitary. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on Jul 31, 2020 18:39:00 GMT
[Unfortunately this also means you have to create two cross-county Staffordshire/West Midlands constituencies instead of one, The West Midlands County Council has not existed since 1986, after only existing for 12 years. Wolverhampton and most of the Black Country has been part of Staffordshire for far longer than that unpopular temporary blip of the worst PM of the 20th century's made-up counties. If we can cope with Stoke being in Staffordshire, despite unitary local government, then we can similarly cope with Wolverhampton being a unitary. I agree with this, but it's also true that a combined Wolverhampton and Dudley are fine for 6 seats. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jul 31, 2020 18:40:26 GMT
Be that as it may, the BCE still regarded the Black Country boroughs of Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Wolverhampton as separate from non-metropolitan Staffordshire and Worcestershire in the last two boundary reviews. They are very different areas in most respects. South Staffordshire will almost certainly have to link with either Dudley or Wolverhampton but I think Kingswinford would be more amenable to being in a South Staffordshire/Black Country seat than Wednesfield/North Wolverhampton.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,002
|
Post by Khunanup on Jul 31, 2020 18:42:00 GMT
I've always veered away from Twitter but I suppose, as you say, I could open an account just for this. Is it as simple as taking a screenshot and loading it onto the Twitter account? (Sorry if this is a terribly naive question.)
May I recommend imgbb.com/ – you don't need to open any account to use it. That's what I use. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Jul 31, 2020 18:44:01 GMT
Yes, unfortunately we've had to bring this in. You'll need to use an external image hosting site (of which there are several) and link it in. If anyone has trouble with this do let me know and I'll try to lend a hand. I thought I'd sent a message to admin about this but it seems to have disappeared in the ether. Obviously it'd be good to free up some file space for posters to add interesting/useful pictures to posts, so I'm happy to delete the maps I've recently uploaded. (Perhaps we should've been warned not to upload them.) If everyone agrees, it might be easier for admin to use the site dashboard to delete all user-drawn maps that have been uploaded to the site. It seems I'm not able to remove the images from my posts! So admin have my permission to delete all the images that I've uploaded. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 31, 2020 20:01:11 GMT
I think the issue with crossing the South Staffs/Wolverhampton boundary isn't that they're totally separate - Perton is simply an extension of Tettenhall - but that it doesn't actually make for a better map. Whereas a Walsall/Lichfield crossing does make sense, as the Walsall wards concerned are separate from Walsall proper.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jul 31, 2020 20:14:25 GMT
But Walsall West & Wednesbury sounds so much nicer than the rather clunky Wolverhampton East & Darlaston!
Try this address entry format.
 So sorry for my incompetence, minion, but I don't know what that means.
But I'm seriously impressed that you can upload a visible version of my map when I can't. [ url= address you used ] [ img ] address you used / title of the image as you saved it on yr own computer.png [ /img ] [ /url ] without the spaces of course |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,745
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jul 31, 2020 20:28:56 GMT
So sorry for my incompetence, minion, but I don't know what that means. But I'm seriously impressed that you can upload a visible version of my map when I can't. [ url= address you used ] [ img ] address you used / title of the image as you saved it on yr own computer.png [ /img ] [ /url ] without the spaces of course The images where we've run out of space is where you make a post, click on the 'Add Attachment' button in the top right next to the cog icon (which now doesn't exist), select 'Upload a file', and then select 'insert image in post'. The images that still work are where you click in the image button - the little square landscape icon 7th from the right on the second line on my display) and you get a dialog that says: Image URL: Alt text: where you would then paste or type the URL to an image stored on another website somewhere, and some descriptive text. For instance, I could enter: Image URL: mdfs.net/Docs/Sheffield/CityMaps/2020.gif Alt text: the results in 2020 For advanced use, you can go into 'BBCode View' and enter the URL and text directly with (img alt="alt text")the_url_of_the_img(/img) (tho' with square brackets). That also allows you to set the display size, I often set it to 60% to avoid overwhelming the post. (Technical thought: does ProBoard serve the file straight with a size tag, or does it resize the file? It certainly doesn't with avatars as they often take an age to arrive and appear twelve inches wide until the size tags arrive.) |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jul 31, 2020 20:54:45 GMT
I generally prefer typing my forum code. It's all we had when I first posted on fora, it still works just like it did then, and on occasion it actually works better.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,904
|
Post by YL on Aug 1, 2020 8:28:52 GMT
Let's see if I can provoke Pete Whitehead to get his pitchfork out.  1. North Bedfordshire 69622 2. *Bedford 69557 3. East Bedfordshire 71601 4. Hitchin & Harpenden 70786 5. Leighton Buzzard 70381 6. Luton East 71218 (number not on map) 7. Luton West & Houghton Regis 71962 (number not on map) 8. *North East Hertfordshire 76017 9. *Stevenage 70441 10. South West Hertfordshire 71692 11. Hemel Hempstead 72398 12. Watford 70498 13. *St Albans 70399 14. *Hertsmere 72094 15. Welwyn Hatfield 75459 16. Broxbourne 72339 17. Hertford & Stortford 76054 18. Dunstable & Berkhamsted 69379 * unchanged after realignment to new ward boundaries (which in the case of St Albans removes its Three Rivers component) Seat 3 could be Biggleswade I guess. I agree that Hertsmere is a rubbish name but it's unchanged and coterminous with the district so I don't think it's realistic to change it. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 1, 2020 10:01:01 GMT
No pitchforks but that Dunstable & Berko seat doesn't make much sense really. As has been discussed, it makes far more sense to cross the county boundary (if it has to be crossed, which is probably the case) in the area of Hitchin and break the Hithin/Harpenden link which is illogical
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 12:52:15 GMT
Sorry but I'm with YL on this one. Hitch & Harp may not be perfect but it's an established pairing and if you don't link Harpenden with Hitchen, there's little choice but to link it with Berkhamsted, which is no better and probably worse.
I might quibble about some of the details of YL's plan, shifting a few border wards to and fro, but for my money the basic structure is right.
Also, unlike some other plans in this area, YL's scheme has only one seat crossing the border between Bedford and C Beds. Again, the basic idea is sound, although I'd be inclined to take Sandy rather than stretch all the way south to Woburn.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 13:17:45 GMT
Let's give it a try ...
Rochdale
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 13:20:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 13:27:18 GMT
OK, I give up. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here.
I've uploaded a map onto imgBB and it's assigned it a URL. I put that in the 'Image URL' box. Is that wrong?
I then added a few descriptive words, which appeared, but the image didn't.
Sorry, I'm OK with things like this once I've been through it a few times, but I really struggle with anything new.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Aug 1, 2020 13:30:48 GMT
OK, I give up. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here. I've uploaded a map onto imgBB and it's assigned it a URL. I put that in the 'Image URL' box. Is that wrong? I think so. That url goes to a webpage with the image on it, not to the image itself. The image url (available if you click on it) is i.ibb.co/5LpJQZS/Screenshot-2020-08-01-at-14-13-28.png |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Aug 1, 2020 13:34:45 GMT
OK, I give up. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here. I've uploaded a map onto imgBB and it's assigned it a URL. I put that in the 'Image URL' box. Is that wrong? I think so. That url goes to a webpage with the image on it, not to the image itself. (post not complete, to be editted) The image url (available if you click on it) is i.ibb.co/5LpJQZS/Screenshot-2020-08-01-at-14-13-28.pngThose are some amazing bacon strips, completely obliterating the Tameside-Oldham boundary. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 13:37:32 GMT
Again ...  I may have my tiny faults, but I'm persistent.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 14:06:55 GMT
Those are some amazing bacon strips, completely obliterating the Tameside-Oldham boundary. Yes indeed.
First of all, I'd better defend my reputation, if I have one, by saying that I was posting this map only as an experiment to see whether I'd mastered posting images. (Short answer: No.)
There was some discussion upthread about assigning 7 seats to Rochdale/Oldham/Tameside alongside discussions about respecting the Manchester city boundary and keeping Whitworth in Rossendale. When I first attempted, some weeks ago, to get these boroughs to take 7 seats, without ward splits, I couldn't do it; so in the end I settled for adding Whitworth. But I returned to the area for a more determined effort, and came up with ... well, a map I'd never normally post.
For the record -
Rochdale - 72154 Heywood & Middleton - 72939 Royton - 71391
Those three aren't that bad but now the real carnage begins (names are approximate) -
Oldham - 68991 Ashton-under-Lyne - 70245 Hyde - 69339 Droylesden & Failsworth - 69079
|
|
