Is that what it has come to ...
Smileys as a substitute for substance ?
Where did I mislay my suicide pill?
With further experience it does seem to work more smoothly - and as noted elsewhere the code boxes seem to work now.
...R
Yes the code boxes are working reasonably. But there was no reason to expand the smileys like this.
An extra click for smileys was worth not having less clutter.
Why not get rid of the top row of icons and replace it with another row or two of smileys?
Don
I've noticed a visible lag while they load. Now when I reply to a post there is a lot of tiny text in the smiley area, which is replaced (fairly quickly) by the smiley icons. I say "fairly quickly" but with so many of them you can certainly notice the delay.
Surely with everything so slow, mandating the download 50 or so images per reply is too much? I know there is client-side caching, but even so.
So, having changed javascript libraries, we have reverted to the previous format for smileys, just so much more of them. I have no intention of investigating it, but I wonder to what extent the current Google "ajax" library is simply a re-packaging of the previous one?
I am so used to it that when it occurred yesterday, it did not occur to me that there was anything different. Don't you have your NBN? 
Hey fella, this is Web 2.0! Get with it!
Or maybe feel mighty pleased that this site only contains spurious crap from two third-party domains, ajax.googleapis.com and google-analytics which are presumably quite benign (though I necessarily always block the latter), and not the twits, facepalm and such. Things could be a lot worse than a few tiny gifs (which no longer have their mouse-over descriptors). Mind you, given that, it is still puzzling why it takes so long to load that last little bit of each page, clearly not actually important to the rendering.
I am so used to it that when it occurred yesterday, it did not occur to me that there was anything different. Don't you have your NBN?
I trust that is said in jest.
Despite living about 10 km from one of Australia's major capital cities (Melbourne) the rollout date for the NBN in my suburb is "not currently available" and I am frankly not holding my breath waiting for it.
Mind you, given that, it is still puzzling why it takes so long to load that last little bit of each page, clearly not actually important to the rendering.
I would be embarrassed if my forum took something like 30 seconds to finish loading a page, routinely.
And, check this out: Near the bottom of forum pages is a "jump to" drop-down box which is handy for switching to another part of the forum. If you click on the box it routinely takes a few seconds for the list to appear (clearly it is being downloaded from the forum). Why? Why not populate the list when the page is being built? It all adds to the sluggishness of the feel of the forum.
The speed will most probably become reasonable once the team has finished what they are doing. I recall they mentioned having problems with the server side caching. If they are fixing this and its disabled then it could be the culprit.
The forum was blisteringly fast for a small time period after the new site came online.
pYro_65:
The forum was blisteringly fast for a small time period after the new site came online.
That was probably what made me say, in the opening post, that it seemed much smoother.
Let's hope the risk of blisters returns.
...R