Replaced enormous graphic with a link.

I think "clearly" isn't as clearly defined in this context as you might like.

Stop bumping up the thread if you're not going to respond to other posters and just reference images that had been posted long ago in the AVS links from your original post. You have a history of being antagonistic to HD DVD on this forum, and though your original post was appropriately worded as a caveat emptor, your behavior since is starting to become transparent.

Posting thumbnails linking to the original images is perfectly fine, but the way you've drawn it out -- twice now posting a single image when the thread starts to drop off the front page -- while avoiding replying to what anyone else has said strikes me as questionable, at least.

what on earth are you talking about. i most certainly did post a detailed response after putting up the comp shot in the first post (which you decided to turn into a link instead of thumbnailing for some reason) while the last post by suprmallet isn't an invitation to anything beyond "i see it", followed by "i don't see it". since you decided to make it more difficult for consumers to see these comparison shots by edditing the first post it seemed prudent to post it here again and let the picture speak for itself. incidentally the thread was only a couple from the top of the page when i responded, so your paranoid feelings regarding bumping of threads are your own issue to deal with. please behave more like a moderator and less like a format chearleader.

Why is the onus on me to download your image, make a thumbnail, upload the thumbnail, and edit your post? I think posting a glacially-slow loading image over a thousand pixels wide in-thread is obnoxious. If your interest was chiefly in making a thumbnail available, why didn't you edit the original post and put the thumbnail there?

Oh, give it a rest. If you compare your posting history with mine, it's very apparent which one of us is blindly devoted to a particular format.

I'm not anti-Blu-ray, I don't have a habit of disparaging the format, and I'm critical of HD DVD when it's warranted. If I were a format cheerleader, why would I vocally support the wording of your original post, and why didn't I close/delete this thread when asked to earlier?

you were the one who took it on himself to edit the image. i'd point out that the images josh posted take up almost exactly half the pixels of the one in my post, and were posted twice (quoted). consistency, old boy...

two birds, one stone. an answer to supremallet, and replacing the image in the thread.

what happened to your specific allegations against me in this thread, instead of this nebulous smear?

wrong on both counts, and swiftly dropped i see when you realised you couldn't back it up. btw, no contact made through pm: nice moderation...

No, I didn't. I edited your post. Changing an IMG to a URL takes a couple of seconds. Going through the process of creating a thumbnail is much more time-consuming.

...which means they don't push the width of the page. I dislike horizontal scrollbars. If Josh had posted obnoxiously large images, I would've removed those too. The speed with which that image was loading before was another annoyance. A direct reference to the image works fine, but whatever ImageShack code was in there before was causing it to slowly load line by line.

...but he'd already seen the images, had he not?

They're still there. Other people are discussing. You're recycling old images from threads you posted links to days ago.

We don't have PMs active for general users on DVD Talk.

the imagehost creates the thumb. it takes 30secs to up and post the link.

it barely altered the width of the page, while a slow loading image is certainly nothing new on the net.

who knows, it wasn't imediately obvious anything had changed with the first post after you'd changed it.

the images were burried under a weight of other detritus, and there was already at least one request in this thread to have info posted here instead of having to search through another site's forums. besides which those pages took ages to load.

then for that suggestion, i am sorry.

I don't use an image host, though.

It did for me with the way I have things configured on my PC at work. My kneejerk reaction is "horizontal scrollbar == bad".

...which is fine, and I have no objection to those same images being posted here.

It's just the combination of your obvious distaste for HD DVD, bumping up a thread attacking a release on that format, and re-posting images instead of directly contributing to the discussion seems suspicious to me. If there's no basis for those suspicions and I offended you, then I apologize.

Burnt Thru, are you and Xylon one and the same?

Why is a BD-only supporter posting news about a possible bad transfer of an exclusive HD DVD title? If you are for the competing format, why would you bring up such a thread to warn the "other side"? Just curious.

I thought this forum was getting away from that. Some of our former members used to do the same thing very frequently.

On the flipside, we have allegedly neutral reviewers posting in threads disparaging the format they don't like or don't want to win and picking fights with the posters they think champion those formats. I think everyone needs to just chill out a bit.

Maybe we need a sticky with the ground rules headlining this subforum. Everyone seems to be fine until somebody new comes in and inadvertantly flares things up.

On people bitching about the AVS nitpicking: This is what AVS used to be/is all about. They've long been a place for a/v fans to go and debate minor details on equipment, setup, pq/aq, etc... It's only recently that they've seen an influx of noobs posting format praise BS or posting questions like "why are there black bars on my HD movies???"

I dont think anyone can say that a 720p satellite broadcast movie is supposed to look better and more detailed then a 1080p encoded strait off of the master at high bitrate hd-dvd. There is proof of this here in the pictures. How anyone can deny it, i dont know.

There is something wrong with the HD-DVD release if the 720p broadcast version looks better. What caused the problem, no idea. But it's a problem.

Any answer on this, BT? Did you create those screencaps yourself?

was just reading a few posts on another site and thought i'd come look at the thread here discussing the review of traffic on this site. seems it's no longer here, though i can remember posting to it. did josh ask the owner to remove it out of embarresment?

What ever happened to "SEARCH"?
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=497981

EDIT: Maybe you were looking for a different thread, as this is one you started and does not really discuss the "review" per se.

hmm, for some reason nothing came up on either a forum specific search or a global one for "traffic". chears for the thread mr b.

ps: little china is one film i did want a sequal to..

Heh. At the very least I'm hoping FOX gives us a good Blu version of the original. And soon!

Let it go, BT. We've had that debate. It's done.

Or were you just trying to dredge up old posts to use against me elsewhere (I ask rhetorically)? Have you got nothing better to do with your time than hold grudges?

i don't post on any other highdef forums these days, though i do lurk. on a different note, i hope universal re-examines this transfer when they release it on bd.

it's interesting to revisit the earlier days of this format war in the little time capsules that these threads afford. i can't say i'm entirely happy with what i see myself having typed back then. vaguely embarressing would probably be an accurate description. that's not to say there's no merrit to the particular issue of this thread, however..

Wow, talk about dead thread abuse. You should have more respect for the dead.

-beebs

The classics never die, they just sometimes get deleted.

Thread tools > Subscribe to this thread.