Ability to add footer only when comments enabled

[mstevens]

Title:
Ability to add footer only when comments enabled

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
We would have the ability to add a footer only when comments enabled

Description:
At the moment we can automatically add a footer to crossposts in various situations, but "only when comments enabled" is not one.

This would be desirable, as it would be nice to be able to tell people to come to dreamwidth and comment only when they actually can!

Poll #3194 Ability to add footer only when comments enabled

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 40

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
20 (50.0%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
8 (20.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
5 (12.5%)

(I have no opinion)
6 (15.0%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (2.5%)

Make the site schemes fit the browser size

[alashandra]

Title:
Make the site schemes fit the browser size

Area:
Site Schemes

Summary:
The default site scheme uses a very small amount of the browser width. Those that use the full browser width are too dark to be comfortable to some.

Description:
I admit that my browser isn't exactly the usual. I have a wide screen which means that my browser is wider, too. But I found that using Tropospherical Red and Tropospherical Purple that these site schemes seem to be framed, so that anything that runs beyond the width of the header end up with an interior scroll bar at the bottom of the page.

Checking out the other site schemes, I found that Celerity squished up the later replies to a long thread. The Gradation schemes also take advantage of the full browser width, but they're dark enough to be difficult to the eye.

There should be a few more site scheme choices, including ones with lighter backgrounds. Even a lighter version of the Gradation schemes would be useful.

Poll #3196 Make the site schemes fit the browser size

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 43

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
12 (27.9%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
7 (16.3%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
4 (9.3%)

(I have no opinion)
20 (46.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Implement SPF records for email

[trixtah]

Title:
Implement SPF records for email

Area:
Administration

Summary:
Implment DNS SPF records to facilitate email delivery to large webmail providers

Description:
SPF is an industry standard way of guaranteeing which email servers are permitted to send mail on behalf of your domain. At present, there seems to be a perennial problem with Dreamwidth bulk email being rejected from time-to-time - the "big four" email providers (Gmail, Hotmail, Yahoo and AOL) -do- use SPF records to positively weight email spam scores in favour of bulk emailers.

Dreamwith.org sends mail from one server - it is simple to implement a DNS TXT record that reads "v=spf1 mx ~all" that will verify to any email receiver that checks SPF that your MX server is permitted to send mail on behalf of "@dreamwidth.org" senders.

It also makes the likelihood of future spammers spoofing dreamwith.org addresses in order to send mail much less.

SenderID is also a useful solution, but SPF is simple to implement and will assist with delivery of bulk email to most large email service providers.

Poll #3195 Implement SPF records for email

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 45

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
27 (60.0%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
17 (37.8%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (2.2%)