Have A Nice Day! :)
Better moderation and guidelines needed
Published on September 30, 2005 By WebGizmos In WinCustomize Talk
I'm curious as to why the "Objectdock" library is being flooded with submissions from the "Misc Icons" library that clearly are not "Misc Icons?" Shouldn't these be two different libraries? They are both starting to look the same lately. And doesn't "Misc" mean just that...misc...as in the odd icon? It seems that whole Icon packages are either broken down, or not packaged and submitted as "Misc Icons" instead of them being packaged and submitted as a package to the "Iconpackager" library, which if you look through the library of "Objectdock" you can see there is nothing "Misc" or odd about many of these icons...since they could easily make up a whole package. It's as if I'm watching Mormegils icon tutorial all over again.
Comments (Page 4)
10 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Aug 24, 2006
on Aug 24, 2006
on Aug 24, 2006
on Aug 24, 2006
I'd just like to make something clear here, that alot of people seem to miss...

.ico files can be used with ObjectDock.

It is EASY to convert a png file to an ico. There are MANY free programs out there to do this, and even Stardock has one... its called IconDeveloper and works very well. There is NO reason at all that there needs to be png files uploaded into the ObjectDock gallery, when they can easily be made into ico files and put in the Misc. Icons gallery, as they should be. This would prevent a huge proportion of the 'flooding' in the ObjectDock gallery.

This only leaves one final problem... what to do with all the existing png's in the ObjectDock gallery? Should they just be purged? Should a comparison with the Misc. Icons section be made? We *could* just remove all the duplicates from the ObjectDock library that are in the Misc. Icons as well... I think that would be a good start.

Its rather unfortunate that we've allowed this to continue as long as it has, since we've created our own mess to deal with now, with the huge amount of duplicate entries. Hopefully something can be resolved that will satisfy everyone concerned, and make both sections easier to work in.

(I wonder if Stardock would consider a stripped-down IconDeveloper so that users could more easily convert from png to ico in bulk...)
on Aug 24, 2006
Once y'all get it all worked out....

.ico files and .png files can be used with DesktopX too. To make super icons.
on Aug 24, 2006
made into ico files and put in the Misc. Icons gallery, as they should be

So.  

stripped-down IconDeveloper

I'd BUY it! ($!)

super icons
        




on Aug 24, 2006
  @Justin   
on Aug 24, 2006
one of my complaints about the misc icons and od libraries has been the duplication of submissions. how many submissions of photoshop cs icons/png's are needed? that's one example. there seems to be many submissions of ie and firefox icons/png's too. i can understand one or two different takes on the basic image but is there really a need for 5 pages of 25 images each of photoshop releated images? and yes, i realize some are not for the CS and are quite old but still ........ there's 3 pages of photoshop cs images! i'm sorry but enough is enough. very few have their own unique style. quite a few are copies of each other.
on Aug 24, 2006
ive found that icon files work better with object dock...png's seem to use much more memory
on Aug 24, 2006
and all too often...you see an icon submitted to misc. icons and shortly thereafter the same image in png will be posted in objectdock. i am even guilty of this on occasion...
on Aug 25, 2006
I know what you mean Snidely...it just doesn't make any sense...and wastes space.
on Aug 25, 2006
Cerebro...all good ideas...just PLEASE stay away from that word purged...you're talking 'bout me icons there
on Aug 25, 2006
ok...ok snidley! I can take a hint...you don't have to beat me over the head with it (bad bandit...bad, bad bandit...no more CS icons *slap*)
on Aug 25, 2006
Truthfully...I don't mind what is done here, just so everyone is happy again...purge, delete, liquify, puree, doesn't bother me a bit...isn't gonna cause any physical harm to my person, and most definately isn't gonna tick me off at this site or it's administrators. I'm afraid you guys are stuck with me...(HEY! I HEARD THAT GROAN!)
I like the site and the way it is run...and I like the fellowship, yeah, that's the word, fellowship...now...CARRY ON SKINNIN' PEOPLE!
on Sep 02, 2006
Still no comments from the powers that be.   
10 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last