# New forum



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

Err....wow.

Well this was a surprise to come on here and see.

Edit: Just saw that post it about the redesign, didn't notice that before.
Either way, it's running smoothly and quick, which is good.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

Not so quick from my point of view. The site is very slow. Hopefully this will be addressed.
Ads are tastefully done. 
The large headers are a pain.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

McBulls said:


> Not so quick from my point of view. The site is very slow. Hopefully this will be addressed.
> Ads are tastefully done.
> The large headers are a pain.


Slow on my part too. I am not too fond on the new look. Like yesterday's a lot better. This look has the feel that too much is going on.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

It could be just me with my inabilty to adapt to change quickly, but i hate this new format for the forum. Its ugly, the colour scheme is awfully tacky and boring. The whole wooden floor background is just dreadful. The website is terribly slow and laggy, because of all that unnesscary nonsense that has been added to it. I guess once a website is offically sponsored by someone it is taken over by advertisments so its not a supirse. But i liked the way it was before, nice and simple. It was easy to post opinions and it was sufficient of what was needed and nesscary, and now with all this unnesscary nonsense, its going to get awhile to get used to.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

It started slow for me, but now seems snappy. It's going to take a little while for my eyes to adjust, but so far, so good.


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> Not so quick from my point of view. The site is very slow. Hopefully this will be addressed.


For the most part it's not in everyone's internet cache, so the first visit is going to be painful when comparing to the previous trips. 

If it's really a problem for people, adblock and firefox are your friend, just block all the background images, headers and ads and watch it fly.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

This'll take a bit of getting used to! But, like with just about anything else it should be just fine. Like some have pointed out, I could do without the huge header. About the only other thing that seems "quirky" to me is the the "down" arrow on the right-hand scroll bar doesn't work. I can drag the scroll bar. I can hit the "down arrow" and I can use the wheel, but clicking on that little "down arrow" doesn't work. (at least not on the main screen... It works in this reply view.)

Anyways, I don't have too much of a problem with speed and, hey, good job guys!

Edit: Nevermind on the scroll-bar thingy. It's working now. Could have been my quirky laptop!

Edit #2: Hey! Where's all my 13,000,000 points!!!! #$&^@!!!!! (I don't even know what those points were supposed to represent - but I figured 13 million of 'em couldn't be all that bad! And how does one go about getting .76 of a point?)


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

I give it high points for flash, but I'm not sure about this from a functionality standpoint. The background is a little distracting, as is the ad at the bottom of the site with the players popping out of the frame. Still, looks very hi-fi and runs fairly quickly for me.


----------



## rdlviper (May 24, 2006)

The players popping out is only if you're not logged in. Its to encourage new registrations.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

kulaz3000 said:


> It could be just me with my inabilty to adapt to change quickly, but i hate this new format for the forum. Its ugly, the colour scheme is awfully tacky and boring. The whole wooden floor background is just dreadful. The website is terribly slow and laggy, because of all that unnesscary nonsense that has been added to it. I guess once a website is offically sponsored by someone it is taken over by advertisments so its not a supirse. But i liked the way it was before, nice and simple. It was easy to post opinions and it was sufficient of what was needed and nesscary, and now with all this unnesscary nonsense, its going to get awhile to get used to.



100 % agree. I am very upset, because of all above-mentioned reasons.It goes to the worthless NBA and Bulls websites as well.

I can see why we are “suffering” because of advertisement, but for God sake where does that stupid decoration come from? If this is a part of advertisement “mechanics”, why did they choose this forum? 

Instead they could easily create a page with a half naked cheers leaders or Paris Hilton’s details or. …whatever turns them on, but not this page.


----------



## PowerWoofer (Jan 5, 2006)

I gotta agree with the "I don't like this new design" posters. I can get used to new things, IF it's got a good design, and is very user friendly. This new forum look hurts my eyes (the court background), and the ads all over the place really take a LOT of space.

Not to mention the entire looks is different, and everything that used to be in a certain spot has now moved somewhere, else complicating the need for me to find it. :biggrin:

I loved the old design, even though it was bland and had no real details. That's what was good about it, because it wasn't distracting, and was easy to navigate.

Anyway, enough of my ranting.

I can't change the minds of the guys who run this forum, but I wish they'd take a second look at what they changed. (Sorry, the design just sucks, IMO.) lol


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I've been through a major site redesign twice before this one. Before you all go postal over the new look, let me say what I've learned from the past two:

1) people are resistant to change. Over time, you'll get used to the new style

2) It's just day 1, we're not stuck with everything as-is forever. What we're looking at now is a very professionally done layout with added features that are required for the site to move to the next level. This means the ads, which pay the bills. 

It also means we're going to have scores and schedules and stats and game previews and in-game updates and all kinds of great stuff.

3) Figure out what your real nits are with the new design and gripe about them in the comments/suggestions forum. They will be addressed. They won't be if you don't speak up!

4) Assume the guys doing the site look/feel aren't trying to piss people off, but make things better. Your support and help goes a long way to that end (making it better).

Regards to all​


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

It's way too slow. took me 1/2 hour just to log in and go through four pages to post this message. I'll try again tomorrow, but sometimes we have to realize that progress isn't always progress. I'm sorry the owners of this site feel the need to take it to another level. I liked the old level.

Peace. If I don't make it back, I'll be seeing some of you around the net.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

Love the new design but the site's way too slow right now.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

Pros: 

-Scoreboard, headline, photo of the day are OK touches that I can live with. Are we going to add a trade checker and call it instead a "trade verifier" ? :biggrin: 

Cons: 

-Those google ads underneath the scoreboard, etc. are annoying and as a result the heading takes up more than 3/4 of my screen on my "15 laptop at its highest resolution. I don't see any posts until I scroll down. Maybe you could push those ads even further down the page ?

-I don't like how there are so few posts on so many pages.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Guys -
We understand speed is an issue and we're working it. I know that's irritating, but give us a couple days and we'll be better than we were before. That's the whole point, of course, of doing the upgrade!


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

The 6ft Hurdle said:


> -I don't like how there are so few posts on so many pages.


6ft-
Go to UserCP and change your thread display options -> Number of Posts to Show Per Page to a larger setting and you'll be all set!


----------



## WestHighHawk (Jun 28, 2003)

MikeDC said:


> 6ft-
> Go to UserCP and change your thread display options -> Number of Posts to Show Per Page to a larger setting and you'll be all set!


I'm not 6ft, but I just changed mine to 15 per page...much better. Hmmm...maybe I'll go for a higher number.

Thanks, MikeDC.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Its all about getting used to the new structure. I dont like the part below the site's banner, with "Photo of the day" etc, but its not bad.
A tad slow, yes.


----------



## ballafromthenorth (May 27, 2003)

I don't mind it! It was a nice surprise.


----------



## RSP83 (Nov 24, 2002)

Ok, so David Stern have discovered this site and took over.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

Thanks Mike, was that posts per page a new addition? Never noticed it before, but that's a great option.

Is the scoreboard going to be clickable sometime ? Seems not to understand what OT is. Kind of a weird day in basketball with NJ and Phoenix scoring 161/157 in not one OT, but TWO OTs. Seeing the OT in the Miami game, I thought Miami Sacramento really took one overtime to score just 64 and 57 points respectively. Interesting, till I looked at the CBS Sportsline scoreboard and Miami/Sacramento was actually still in the beginning of the 4th quarter. 

It's nice that the scoreboard updates though.

I like how the new "basketballFORUM" symbol has both a headband and wristband. Least we know this site run by a bunch of mostly Bulls fans isn't going to be micromanaged by PaxSkiles.


----------



## dkg1 (May 31, 2002)

WTF is going on here? It took me forever to be able to post here, not sure I'll be back... This was an unwelcome surprise...Ugly, ugly ugly


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

If there's anything I've learned from my experience thus far with programming or anything electrical, it's that upgrades never hit the ground running full speed. 
It may take people awhile to get used to the design, but I'm sure the speed won't be an issue once they get it ironed out and up and chugging.

I think it's already much faster then it was a bit earlier.
Good job team.


----------



## LegoHat (Jan 14, 2004)

It will take some time to get used to this layout, but I think I'll like it once it's fully up and running. There weren't a lot of people who liked the last site upgrade either, but eventually they come around.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

The 6ft Hurdle said:


> Thanks Mike, was that posts per page a new addition? Never noticed it before, but that's a great option.


I change most forums I frequent to 25 posts per page. I changed my options on the new layout to 25, but immediately had to change it back to 15 after reading the posts from tonight.

Strange what you get used to over time.


----------



## BeZerker2008 (Jun 29, 2006)

I thought there was some change but wow what a change they made. I thought I was in the wrong forum, seemed like orange colors and a 23 with a headband & I thought I must have stumbled into the Cavaliers site by mistake. 

I think that if they should change it at least have some Bulls colors and maybe something related to Jordan than just having a #23 above. JMO.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

The 6ft Hurdle said:


> Thanks Mike, was that posts per page a new addition? Never noticed it before, but that's a great option.
> 
> Is the scoreboard going to be clickable sometime ? Seems not to understand what OT is. Kind of a weird day in basketball with NJ and Phoenix scoring 161/157 in not one OT, but TWO OTs. Seeing the OT in the Miami game, I thought Miami Sacramento really took one overtime to score just 64 and 57 points respectively. Interesting, till I looked at the CBS Sportsline scoreboard and Miami/Sacramento was actually still in the beginning of the 4th quarter.
> 
> ...


LOL, it could be done by the Bulls marketing department though!

Yeah, we need to get that scoreboard worked on... just seeing the scores doesn't add a whole lot


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Looks purty enough.

Loads fast on my broadband connection.

I like the Web 2.0 style of editing / saving posts now. 

The header at the top of the page is too big. It would be nice to be able to customize the content in the header. I care about NBA Scores, not so much about photo of the day.

I'm sure the technical glitches will be resolved over the next week.

Software releases can be a pain in the ***.... even if proper planning / testing was done ahead of time.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Looks purty enough.
> 
> Loads fast on my broadband connection.
> 
> ...


I agree with this. The scores are a fun feature, but people come to this site for basketball discussion, not real time score updates. The fact that the site has the capacity to deliver that is great, but I think they should be limited to a single line scroll bar. Let's not take up 80% of the first screen one sees upon entering the site with info that most people didn't come here for. My two cents.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Who am I to complain ? 

I'll continue to be little beneath thy site


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

It's kinda giving me a headache.

But its going a little faster than it was when I posted those same six words on the Blazers forum about a half hour ago.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

WestHighHawk said:


> I'm not 6ft, but I just changed mine to 15 per page...much better. Hmmm...maybe I'll go for a higher number.
> 
> Thanks, MikeDC.


I know Jamel Irief and I both use 50 posts/page. I've seen a handful of other posters suggest it.

Huge time saver.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

IMO, nothing (other than advertisements) should be jeopardizing the speed and readability. The website is terribly slow, because of all that unnecessary nonsense that has been added to it:

1.Color scheme is not friendly. I like to see a black font color and white background.
2.The whole wooden floor background is just ugly. No background is the best option and it will speed up loadings.
3.The header is too big.
4.Scoreboards, headline news and photo of the day should be eliminated. 


But again as SKC said, who am I to complain.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm still thinking about it. 

Not crazy about what's taking up the whole top of the page. The rest will take getting used to.


----------



## Bulls_Bulls_Bulls! (Jun 10, 2003)

Strangely enough, I was not able to access this site at all yesterday evening, but this morning, it's working just fine. Also noted the new name change: no longer bbb.net, but still gets you here if you type the old URL in...


----------



## tmpsoft (Sep 7, 2004)

The color scheme is awful, I'm getting a headache reading the posts..


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

The most troubling new development:

The silhouette in the banner is wearing...a _headband_!


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Other suggestions...

The members / guests browsing forum should be on the top of the page. Having it on the bottom is next to useless, IMO. Who is going to scroll down that far to use it?

The large top header should be collapsible divs. If the user clicks or mouses over on NBA Scores, they should see NBA scores. If the user clicks or mouses over on image of the day, they should see it. The current header is just too big. I should be able to see who is on the forum and what the latest posts are without having to scroll a full page down. 


Easy for me to say.  Takes me 1 minute to write.... several hours to implement.

EDIT: Also, you should be able to see what users are browsing a certain thread.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

I'm a big fan of the KISS rule of design, and this definately does not comply. There's just far too much going. That said, as a non-paying customer, who am I to complain?


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

Rawse said:


> The most troubling new development:
> 
> The silhouette in the banner is wearing...a _headband_!


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

I actually am very impressed with this new design, as far as the layout of the actual thread goes. The Scoreboard at the top is a good idea as well, and I don't mind the size of it.

The only thing I'm unsure of is the parquet floor background, though I think it will just take some getting use to.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> IMO, nothing (other than advertisements) should be jeopardizing the speed and readability. The website is terribly slow, because of all that unnecessary nonsense that has been added to it:
> 
> 1.Color scheme is not friendly. I like to see a black font color and white background.
> 2.The whole wooden floor background is just ugly. No background is the best option and it will speed up loadings.
> ...


I agree with all of the above. Also, it still seems to take an awfully long time to be able to post, but is MUCH better than was yesterday. I did not exaggerate when saying it took me a half hour just to be able to post.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

I like the new look and (hopefully) it brings in some new revenue opportunities. It is very difficult to make dinero much less break even on the Net these days...

Great job guys.


----------



## chibul (Oct 14, 2006)

*Off Topic: New Board Layout*

UGH! 

It looks HORRIBLE. Just my opinion.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Merge!


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Like many of the posters have stated, I don't really feal like I can give an opinon yet on the look of the site -- I'm just too used to the old one right now. It will probably be a couple weeks before I can look on this one with 'fresh eyes.' I will say that as a laptop user, the large scoreboard at the top is a little bit difficult to navigate. When you have a track pad it's nice to be able to scroll as little as possible, and with the new features (even though they're nice), I have to scroll through an extra page every time I load a thread.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

I fear change.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

rdlviper said:


> The players popping out is only if you're not logged in. Its to encourage new registrations.



good to know, cause antoine walker really wasn't doing it for me. antoine walker? 

not sure about the wood floor - kinda pointless, imo. in fact, it's ugly too. i mean i get it. wood floor. but it's the first thing that loads and honestly, i thought "ick". 

like the scoreboard at the top. though if i want to follow live scores, i'll probably still have another window open to ESPN or something. it's just easier.


HATE, HATE, HATE the color scheme. please consider a return to B/W for the posts. haven't browsed to other teams forums, but i think the red and black distinguished very quickly to a casual viewer that you were in a BULLS forum, ya know. 

overall it loads fast for me (high speed cable)

happy that the :bananallama: survived this new evolution. whew!!






and, have to admit, kinda wish i was still a mod after seeing the








thingy.

that is kinda _fabulous_.



EDIT: i agree about being able to see the users browsing thread feature. need that restored asap.


----------



## chibul (Oct 14, 2006)

Well, it was fun being able to post with other Bulls fans while it lasted. This is just too slow and too unbearable, though...and to actually pay for a message board? No thanks. (Yes, you can post if you aren't a member...but you have a billion ads/other things to slow the page down if you're not paying.)


----------



## ballafromthenorth (May 27, 2003)

I'm on high speed cable and it's being quite slow for me now too.. Odd.. cause it was fast before.. Oh well, I'm sure it'll take care of itself soon enough.


----------



## NeTs15VC (Aug 16, 2005)

Well the speed by now is great well atleast for me and when I came on the first time to see the design I actually liked it A LOT, I dont know what you guys think but yea


----------



## Philomath (Jan 3, 2003)

The things that take 5+seconds to load for me after everything else is done are the headlines. 

Also, until you log in, not only does Antoine Walker's bulbous noggin block some usable screen space, but most times the actual content only takes 3" of vertical space on my screen - in other words, the vertical scroll bar ends after the top 3" of the screen. The rest of the screen is parquet floor. I had to get creative to even log in, at which time it resolved itself.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

mizenkay said:


> EDIT: i agree about being able to see the users browsing thread feature. need that restored asap.


Tts still there, its just at the bottom of the page now. Which i agree with others that have pointed it out, pretty pointless, because i think its a feature that alot of people use, and to have it at the bottom of the page is a big nuisance.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

kulaz3000 said:


> It could be just me with my inabilty to adapt to change quickly, but i hate this new format for the forum. Its ugly, the colour scheme is awfully tacky and boring. The whole wooden floor background is just dreadful. The website is terribly slow and laggy, because of all that unnesscary nonsense that has been added to it. I guess once a website is offically sponsored by someone it is taken over by advertisments so its not a supirse. But i liked the way it was before, nice and simple. It was easy to post opinions and it was sufficient of what was needed and nesscary, and now with all this unnesscary nonsense, its going to get awhile to get used to.


I second all that.

I haven't had any speed problems but this format is so unpleasing to my eyes. I could never get myself to follow the other board because of that. It kind of breaks my heart but I don't think I can post here anymore, see ya guys.


----------



## Qwst25 (Apr 24, 2004)

WOW! I actually think this is much better than what we had before. It looks professional and it doesn't have that one ad that always messed things up on the old one. I like the changes and I think this is well done. 

Good job.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

A few of things.

Users browsing forum is at the bottom, and it was on the top. I'm working on getting that moved back to the top. Users browsing thread always was at the bottom.

There's really just a handful of real issues with the new layout that make it uncomfortable, and all of these can and will be addressed. I remember the last makeover I did and all the fixup kind of stuff I had to do to get it right. It took some time - why not give this new look a chance?

It's still about the content. As long as we keep posting, there's going to be good stuff to read and good people to discuss the bulls and other things with.

THE most frustrating thing for me in all my years at bbb.net has been my inability to keep the server running 24x7x365. It was an utter embarassment to have the server not respond on lotto day, on draft night, when Kobe scored 81, whn the Wallace signing was done, and so on. We just didn't have the resources needed to sustain the kind of growth we experienced over the last year (something like 3x).

So what we're looking at now is what proper resources can do. The new look isn't quite right yet, and all the complaints are perfectly valid. But it's come at a significant cost that we couldn't have born in the past and further costly upgrades are coming soon, and we're going to be very happy about those.

We're really the same bbb.net as always, though. From the admins to the cms to the moderators, things haven't changed, and we're all "addicted" to this place

So my advice for now is to give it a little time and see how things work out. I know the verticalscope guys and they're no against us, they're with us.

Cheers​


----------



## anorexorcist (Aug 3, 2005)

i like the sexy little "premium member" thingy under my name but that's about it. i think there are wayyy too many whistles and bells on this new version.

i do have a problem with the header too, some sites have pushed their fancy headers to the bottom of the page as a solution and put their "basic" header up top. you guys should try that.

but hell, i come here to chat bulls with you guys, i don't see that changing. whateva


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

I like the new site. I think it is a little easier on the eyes frankly. The red on the previous site was a little much.

Everything loads for me just fine.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> Users browsing forum is at the bottom, and it was on the top. I'm working on getting that moved back to the top. Users browsing thread always was at the bottom.


I'm not seeing the "users browsing thread" feature at all when I browse - is it hidden somewhere?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ViciousFlogging said:


> I'm not seeing the "users browsing thread" feature at all when I browse - is it hidden somewhere?


It's off for some reason. I hope to turn it on on Monday.
​


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

I wonder about the Antoine Walker/Jerry Stackhouse graphic at the bottom the page, which I now realize only appears for non-users. I was a lurker on this board for a good few months before I decided to sign up. What ultimately sold me was seeing interest dialogue taking place over a fair chunk of time, not a flashy graphic. Frankly, the graphic is so annoying that if I stumbled upon the board now I'm not sure I'd stick around long enough to get sold on the site. I realize this doesn't really affect me, but I hope the admin's consider ditching the graphic, as I don't think it really does what it's supposed to do.


----------



## Philomath (Jan 3, 2003)

The Walker ad reminds me of a nag screen for shareware lol. Sign up or we'll annoy you to distraction. Together with the other functionality issues, I'm also afraid lurkers will be unable to see the attraction and leave rather than lurking, much less signing up.

On a slightly less negative note - since I got my cookie cached again (not a euphemism), and am essentially always signed in, things have been much more functional. (The multiple little irritations in trying to read the content do seem to add up though. Honestly, I find it a little less addictive.) 

For those who work on this stuff - despite all the complaints, I (and I'm sure all the non-supporting parasites) do still appreciate all the hard work that must have gone into the redesign - believe it or not :biggrin: . Thanks.


----------



## Rodman (Feb 5, 2004)

Positives:
- scoreboard feature is nice
- headlines are okay
- the site is much quicker as before

Negatives
- design is horrible, hopefully I'll get used to it, b/c it's really a turnoff to visit the site. It looks unprofessional for me like something you do the first time you use frontpage.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

I'm absolutely outraged that we no longer have the RPG function! *MUST FIGHT GOLLUM!!!*


----------



## OziBull (Nov 7, 2004)

Not a fan of the new layout at all really! 
i loved the old one! Why fix something thats not broke!


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Wynn said:


> I'm absolutely outraged that we no longer have the RPG function! *MUST FIGHT GOLLUM!!!*


Gollum will never die again.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

I don't like being critical when I know you guys probably worked really hard at this. And though I don't care for the "wood" backdrop, all that really matters is the words the posters type. 

My only beef is that I find the speed to be wildly inconsistent. But I don't know **** about computers or websites, so I'm sure this is something that just takes time to get the bugs out.

Like going to a brand new restaurant. It takes the kitchen awhile to get into a flow.


----------



## r1terrell23 (Feb 11, 2006)

I was having login trouble for a while but it's okay now. As for the site it's going to take a while for everyone to get used to but it does seem smoother than before.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Am finding everything almost back to the speed of the old format..... except the reply function. If I hit "Quick Reply" it seems fine, but just "Reply" or "Quote" take forever to come up. Is this consistent with anyone else's experience, or does it have to do with my set-up? Also, seems like my smilies don't work.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Wynn said:


> Am finding everything almost back to the speed of the old format..... except the reply function. If I hit "Quick Reply" it seems fine, but just "Reply" or "Quote" take forever to come up. Is this consistent with anyone else's experience, or does it have to do with my set-up? Also, seems like my smilies don't work.


There are two factors to the speed of the pages with the editor on them.

First, the editor is a LOT of javascript, which takes time to download. Then it has to download or at least check to see if the browser's cached versions of all the buttons and smileys and message icons are up to date.

Second, the speed of your computer. It takes time to run the javascript, so the editor can take a second or two to even start up. As well, it takes your computer some time to draw everything.​


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

Still too slooooooooooooooooooooow. 

Maybe just early glitch?


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

> Still too slooooooooooooooooooooow.
> 
> Maybe just early glitch?


Thought it was my ISP, but seems like the hosting isn't living up the expectations.


----------

