truefusion

It happened because it is a duplicate post of this. Even if you wrote it, the rules do not allow it. If you want to inform others about a scam, do so with different wording.

You should note the CSS @import rule. @import works similar to PHP's include, in that the browser grabs the content of the CSS file that the @import rule points to and parses it along with the remaining CSS. You can avoid the overhead from PHP by using @import instead if you're going to slice your CSS code into pieces. You can read more about the @import rule here.

The maximum width is 450px, so my sig is within the rules. If the image is accessible, it should be fine.

Here's an entry for you: I may have gotten a bit carried away with it, though. :angel:

I like the heavenly glow of it. And is that empty grey-ish bar at the bottom for tags, comment notifications, et cetera? I think it would look better if the box had a brighter color, one that leans towards that purple-ish color in the navigation bar. And the navigation text, are those images? Or is the emboss effect a CSS drop-shadow effect? And the line between "Misc" and "Freebies" seems inappropriate.

Every process has their own folder located in /proc. The directory name of the process is the same as the process's ID. In other words, let's say your script's process ID is 3, its process information would be located at /proc/3. However, Linux provides a directory known as "self." The self directory located at /proc/self is used to access the currently running program. This allows the program to obtain information about itself without having to know its process ID. I, however, do not know which file or directory you would have to read from in order to obtain the current CPU usage of the process, but this should provide some insight for you.Using PHP functions, i only know how to have PHP tell me how much memory it wasted and how long it took to execute the script. You can probably find a system tool that can retrieve the CPU usage by process ID and use exec() to retrieve the information from stdout, but i don't know what program exactly that would be.

Provide us with the code that you modified. That error is not enough information to help us help you.

The modifications to the software could also be security modifications. Normally, the forum developers provide an in-depth change log, so you can go through it and see if it is worth upgrading. If you are going to be modding up a forum, upgrading will be an annoying task. If there is nothing worth upgrading for, then you can avoid upgrading and avoid the hassle. Plus, upgrades may include new security exploits that managed to creep in without the knowledge of the developers.

I believe that was basically the same or similar code logic that the topic starter was using. The only way that would work is if that XML file you are including has this or something similar as its first line:<?php echo "<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"UTF-8\"?>"; ?>

To add to what BuffaloHelp said, the fact that print returns a value can be quite interesting when using it in certain areas where you otherwise would not have thought of. For example, you can then do things like: return print "Some debugging text or whatever.";if (print "Entering if 'here'" && $var){// ...} print will most likely always return true.

The CSS3 property background-size is currently not supported by browsers (at least to my knowledge), so it is not currently possible to stretch a background image without editing the image itself. If it works in Firefox, then it will most likely show the same way in Opera, Chrome, Safari and similar. The tricky part normally deals with Internet Explorer. I would seriously suggest using the DIV element instead of a table. DIV elements automatically stretch to as wide as they are allowed to by the context and don't require any child elements (tr, td, ...). I would also suggest using using the H1 element instead of all of those BIG elements. For the one below it, maybe H3. If the margins make them far apart, you can adjust the margins using the CSS property, margin.

Unfortunately, due to my screen resolution, i cannot see the problem on my computer (my good monitor died a while ago and have had to resort to an old monitor, which only supports up to 1024x768). But if we look at the code Jonnyabc posted, you can change the positioning by replacing "top" and "right." In the CSS syntax, the word "top" is taking the place of "position from the top of the content;" the word "right" is taking the place of "position from the left of the content." If you want the browser to center the image you can replace "right" with "center." But if you want to provide absolute positioning, you can replace those words with measurements (e.g. 73px, 3em). You can even use negative numbers. This will of course take trial and error to get it to work the way you want it to.

Other people in these forums have had this "problem." The only way to delete the files is to run a script as the same user that "owns" the directories and files. Most likely you can delete the files by simply creating a PHP (or other supported server-side language) script and recursively unlink() each file, and rmdir() each directory, by accessing that script in your browser. By accessing it in your browser, the server should give the script being executed the same ownership as the files you can't delete.

Where does $settings['images_url'] point to? And is the image it is suppose to load located at /images/Header.jpg? If so, then $settings['images_url'] needs to point to /images if it doesn't. Soviet Rathe has most of what need to be done to get the image to show up in the table cell's background. echo "<td style=\"background-image: url(" . $settings['images_url'] . "/Header.jpg);\">";This code, however, will cause the image to loop. If you don't want it to repeat, you can use the CSS property, background-repeat, setting its value to no-repeat.

As the poll indicates, Tramposch is the winner. Userbar:

<? is the shorthand for PHP; adding "xml" after it doesn't help PHP tell the difference. Use anwiii's suggestion by using echo or print instead of just simply including the XML. You can use file_get_contents() if you want. Your WAMP server is probably configured to avoid using the PHP shorthand.

This may be better left for browsers or operating systems rather than a forum. Some browsers have already implemented a text-to-speech feature (e.g. Opera)—though it may be a feature of the operating system itself. Also, Windows Vista and Windows 7 most likely have their own text-to-speech feature which reads practically everything. Nice idea, but i don't think it is something forum developers should take the time to make.

I voted for Tramposch as well. Not really sure of the reason, though.

You can use the last attachment posted. I couldn't come with a nice way to emphasize certain buttons, but that won't stop it from working like it should.

Losing the edit feature isn't something that is significant enough to have user leave or not want to join. I remember when i first joined, when Credit System v1 was in place. The edit feature was disabled since the Credit System didn't have any means of adjusting credits when people edited their posts. Those who abused the system would prepare their actual response, grab some huge random article from anywhere, post it, then edit their post with their actual response. They would get credited for their huge post rather than their credits being modified after editing their posts. And so the edit feature was disable completely (no time limits). This allowed admin and moderators to catch these abusers. Then v2 of the Credit system was introduced. This brought back the edit feature, as whenever a post would be modified (edited, deleted, et cetera), the user's credits would also be modified. The hosting offered during that time was not the same as today. You could not get gigabytes of space (unless you went for paid hosting), you could not get a domain name for free (unless perhaps you took OpaQue's offer), and other things. The system was fitting for the current plans at that time. You would only lose a credit a day, and you could share credits if you wanted to. Since the hosting packages weren't as full as they are today, sharing credits and losing one credit a day was reasonable for the services offered. Now a lot of resources are offered for virtual money (though you can pay it off with "real" money). For that reason, while sharing credits may seem like a nice thing by members, it is not reasonable from a business perspective. Likewise, just simply giving away myCENTs for anything is not reasonable. Due to the way the Credit System is observed to work i can see why the edit feature was reduced. I also understand that there are other reasons (though i may not know what they are) for why the current system works the way it does. But because myCENTs may be offered before someone editing their post, and due to past issues where people would lose Xisto dollars (not myCENTs), therefore not reducing the money earned from the posts but just placing people in the negative myCENTs, the past is being brought into the present—it is the same abuse from Credit System v1. If you can understand that, you should therefore be able to understand why OpaQue said please not to request for any further increase in the time limit. It is understandable why OpaQue would (has) not mentioned anything more than what he has already mentioned about the system. But from the things we do know we can still make suggestions on how to avoid this abuse from users. Why anyone would seek to be so selfish in their ways, which not only affect other users but the entire business itself, is beyond me. But the edit feature was restricted as an attempt to avoid any more unnecessary financial losses. This financial loss is supposed to inform staff members that we should be more strict on those who choose to disobey the rules—though some may not like it. Yeah, we'll try to help out new members by informing them of the rules, but if they get scared off because of punishment they receive for not following the rules even after being informed of them, then Xisto is not to blame for loss of users.

What's the reason for having it 0777? The last time i installed WordPress i didn't have to chmod any .htaccess files. Since you are the one creating and editing the files and not WordPress, there's no need to have it at 0777. 0777 is for accessing and modifying a file from a remote source.

This has been brought up before. [1] [2] Java isn't that hard to learn once you've gotten the hang of the general concepts that can be observed from other languages—though i don't use Java or take the time to learn it completely.

I will say this: You already have the structure worked out in your head (or at least i think you do), so all that is left is the design. I would rather have your limits pushed here. I won't say that designing a web template is easy; if you were to ask me which position i would prefer, a web developer or web designer, i'd pick web developer. In the real world, people don't work on just one design, they come up with as many as time allows, to in the end go with one. This is why they are done on paper first, since it is a whole lot faster designing them on paper than on the computer. There are times where one might come across a website and declare the design (or some parts of it) as simple. But when it comes to trying to make the same thing, we realize how complex it really is. Your website deals with some graphics work (GIMP) and other design work (HTML and CSS), but these template designs don't give away any interesting expression on what to expect from these sections. And i can't say that the design of the template is suitable for a website seeking to consist of tutorials. While WordPress may be used mostly by bloggers, the design doesn't have to reflect something suitable for blogs. I don't think anyone would complain, especially if it is just about rounded corners. The website would still be accessible and you can do everything you can do in other browsers. Plus, if they choose to stick with IE while knowing there are better browsers out there, then they are practically asking for it.

Aside from the navigation alignment, from an eye-appealing perspective, this template doesn't compete with your current. It also seems like you keep falling back on a similar design style as some of your past designs. However, i will say the font you picked for the site's name for this new template is a whole lot better and much more fitting. Your site's icon may need to be changed to reflect the new font. But i'd recommend a few modifications, similar to this (perhaps some bevel): This new template also appears slightly easier to follow, but that can be swayed when the actual content gets set in place. The area where the breadcrumbs are, it seems like a spot more fitting for sub items of the navigation, though you may not have any. By the looks of it, though, i don't think your site requires breadcrumbs at this time. Your navigation isn't multiple levels and all is accessible from every page. While more related to the site as a whole, rather than having a "Home" link, have it so when the user clicks on the site's logo, it takes you home. And if "Home" is a word used by WordPress, change it to your site's name (seems odd seeing "Home > Archive by category 'GIMP'"). "Announcements" aren't tutorials, are they? It should go along with those at the top. Personally, though, i would make the navigation slightly more simpler by creating another root item called "Tutorials" and shoving "GIMP," "HTML & CSS" and "Misc" into it. That way you'd have four root items: Announcements, Freebies, Tutorials and About. It shouldn't have taken more than 30 minutes (assuming you have intermediate knowledge of HTML and CSS)—sounds like you are giving yourself more work than what is required. Here are a few tips to help you speed up the process: Unless it is absolutely necessary to have rounded corners visible in all browsers, use the CSS property border-radius instead. Don't cut out sections that don't need cutting out. Concerning this new design, it requires no more than having four parts cut out: all the gradients (3) and the site's name (1). Keeping in mind that you'll eventually have to cut your design into pieces, design with making your job easier. (However, this current design satisfies this.) For areas of one color, let the CSS handle it. For borders, unless it concerns something complex, let the CSS handle it. Some browsers support SVG backgrounds. SVG is capable of scalable gradients, and a lot of other things, something that no raster image can ever accomplish. Consider this for the next time you use gradients. (However, i think WordPress has a similar feature—which can be seen on its default template.)

I believe it is more along the lines that it is a fact that people say such a thing more than it is the case. To digress for a moment, it is not surprising to see that a lot of your claims target the Catholic faith alone. I don't have anything against Catholics, but i do notice that unbelievers strike their ways more than other denominations. [1] I have not figured out why, but it appears to be obvious that is a statement said from experience. [2] Original sin is a topic all on its own. But Biblically, people are responsible for their own deeds (proof for this can be found in Deuteronomy, unless i'm mistaking it with Leviticus, and Ezekiel); the only time someone is responsible for the deeds of others is when they were the cause of the others' deeds. Therefore, in the case of Adam and Eve, since the devil was the one that caused it to happen, the devil is responsible for Adam and Eve's eating of the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. [3] I have read the majority of the Bible, and i do not know of any instance that has made women in general look bad that is part of the core of Christianity or Judaism. [4] I do not know of any information in the Bible that talks about any pope. There is information that talks about priesthood, but not on a level of the pope. [5] Biblically, Bishops were designated to be men—it is a position for men. The wife of a Bishop, or women in general, play a different role within the church. Women of such authority in the church were (are) supposed be a guiding light for the young(er) women. They are supposed to teach the young women self-control, how to be a good mother and wife, et cetera. Bishops or other men in authority were (are) to take care of managing the church. The letters to Timothy, and probably elsewhere, explain the requirements for being eligible for becoming a Bishop, or a man with authority within the church. [6] There is no evidence within the Bible that suggests that God is a male. While He does have characteristics that fit only males, and while we may say "He" or "Him," Genesis nevertheless mentions that both men and women are made in God's image. This means the terms "man" and "woman" deal with something entirely different from the spirit. The only reason why anyone would claim that a spirit is a man or a woman is because the people who knew them knew them as such (as a man or a woman), due to their physical attributes; it is not because the spirit itself bears any traits that specify that it is male or female. As a FYI: The word "Adam" is Hebrew for "man." It is not always rendered "man" for sake of clarity. The word "woman" is of similar source, the Biblical analogy being Genesis 2:23. [1] Gnostic texts and similar sources contradict the core of the Abrahamic religions. For example, many Gnostic writings that claim to bear some ties with Christianity claim that there is more than one true God. I don't remember exactly which writing it was, but one of them even went as far as to say that Jehovah and Yahweh (or YHWH) represent two different gods. And i think it also said that Eden was a goddess that the other gods were fighting over. You can also pretty much tell they are Gnostic writings due to their emphasis on "being one with wisdom" (they tried to link Jesus's statement in the Gospel of John of "being one with God" to this), their use of words like "Sophia," "Aion," and others, et cetera. [2] I do not remember stating (or implying) that is a stupid act (especially from the part you are addressing). But do you think they would have gone out to find sources that try to explain these things if they didn't question or doubt something within the text? While the sources themselves may or may not already bear that assumption (as these sources could just be notes made publicly from other research), i don't believe the one that searches should be declared a blind follower. Likewise, also note that after much research, questioning things is less and less a thing to be worrying about. For i'm sure that even you after coming to a full understanding of certain things would accept other things that you haven't done much research on, from the same sources. As mentioned, research can increase trust. The trust gained can be the reason for following anything. Many churches i've been to do not follow these traditions. The one church i've been to that at least followed the tradition of women covering their heads, there was nothing observable that insisted on it. In fact, not everyone in the crowd did it, and i saw no one complaining to them about it. Rather, they did it because they wanted to. Is it not the case that if you didn't want to do something, you would consider other options? So it is the case that they do these things because they want to, not because of fear. [3] While it may be the case that those without faith that saves may be condemned, that is still not a reason to make it seem like practically almost every Christian is evil. But you can find the definition in the Gospel of John, chapter 1—if i'm not mistaken. Oh, joy, there's more. How about reading further, say, up to verse 25? (I would say more, but i'm trying to refrain from sarcasm. Believe me, i am very tempted in saying something sarcastic. ) As a personal suggestion: Whenever you see a reference to Biblical verses in a (secular) source (that is in your favor), try to read ahead, or behind even. Not just verses, but chapters as well. It's helped me in debates.