# Names missing?



## longers (10 Feb 2009)

The names of the last poster on a thread seem to be missing from the front page?


----------



## Shaun (10 Feb 2009)

Yes, I know, I removed them.

It allows me to compact the height of the homepage forum lines.

I'm also removing descriptions and will be reducing the height of the lines to reduce the overall height of the home page.

Still beavering away, so not quite there yet.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## longers (10 Feb 2009)

Ok, happy beavering


----------



## spandex (10 Feb 2009)

Thanks shaun

For the update I was thinking it was me or the computer.


----------



## 4F (10 Feb 2009)

Admin said:


> Yes, I know, I removed them.
> 
> It allows me to compact the height of the homepage forum lines.
> 
> ...



boooo I actually liked that bit as you could see who posted last


----------



## Shaun (10 Feb 2009)

spandex said:


> Thanks shaun
> 
> For the update I was thinking it was me or the computer.



No, sorry, I was going to post an announcement, but you know how it is when you get tinkering ... you lose all track of time. 

Should be a nice surprise for everyone who logs in tomorrow morning ... 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## spandex (10 Feb 2009)

Admin said:


> Should be a nice surprise for everyone who logs in tomorrow morning ...


----------



## Shaun (10 Feb 2009)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> boooo I actually liked that bit as you could see who posted last



Well, okay, have a look now ... I've removed the date/time of the last post and put the person back in.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## 4F (10 Feb 2009)

Admin said:


> Well, okay, have a look now ... I've removed the date/time of the last post and put the person back in.
> 
> Cheers,
> Shaun



Horrah


----------



## spandex (10 Feb 2009)

Now that is what I call pimping the site.


----------



## Dave5N (11 Feb 2009)

Much better. Miss the time /date of the last post a bit - more useful than the poster's name.

But it's much better and cleaner overall.


----------



## Dave5N (11 Feb 2009)

Oh and shouldn't cyclo-cross be a sub-section of racing? That's what it is, after all.

Not shoved in with all the beardy-weirdies and their go-karts.


----------



## Shaun (11 Feb 2009)

Dave5N said:


> Oh and shouldn't cyclo-cross be a sub-section of racing? That's what it is, after all.



Ah, yes, good point! 

<waves magic wand>

Ta da!


----------



## longers (11 Feb 2009)

Very neat and tidy, looks good


----------



## Dave5N (11 Feb 2009)

Ta.


----------



## bonj2 (12 Feb 2009)

Dave5N said:


> Oh and shouldn't cyclo-cross be a sub-section of racing? That's what it is, after all.
> 
> Not shoved in with all the beardy-weirdies and their go-karts.


That raises an interesting point. Consider what you've just said.
Cyclocross is a type of racing, but mountain biking isn't.
So do you ONLY ever do cyclocross when you're in a race?   

That suggests that the ONLY reason you would do cyclocross is for the fun of the race, not for the fun of cyclocross itself, and that therefore by definition cyclocross is about as much fun as riding a penny farthing over cobbles.


----------



## mickle (12 Feb 2009)

_Ben_ is right.


----------



## Dave5N (14 Feb 2009)

_Ben_ said:


> That raises an interesting point. Consider what you've just said.
> Cyclocross is a type of racing, but mountain biking isn't.
> So do you ONLY ever do cyclocross when you're in a race?
> 
> That suggests that the ONLY reason you would do cyclocross is for the fun of the race, not for the fun of cyclocross itself, and that therefore by definition cyclocross is about as much fun as riding a penny farthing over cobbles.




Yes bonj. Cyclocross is a racing disciplne. I ride the track, but it's not really a popular leisure activity. (dunno why not.... )

I ride track to get better at riding track. The end is the means.


----------



## Dave5N (14 Feb 2009)

Riding a cyclocross bike off-road, but not in a race, fits neatly into the 'off-road category, n'est-ce-pas?

But it isn't cyclo-cross just because you're on a 'cross bike.


----------



## Dave5N (14 Feb 2009)

_Ben_ said:


> That raises an interesting point. Consider what you've just said.
> Cyclocross is a type of racing, but mountain biking isn't.
> So do you ONLY ever do cyclocross when you're in a race?
> 
> That suggests that the ONLY reason you would do cyclocross is for the fun of the race, not for the fun of cyclocross itself, and that therefore by *definition cyclocross is about as much fun as riding a penny farthing over cobbles.*



Try a race or two. You might just find you like it.


----------

