I agree with John. I can send a check, as I don`t do PayPal either. Since the site will be paid for by us, could the maximum photo size be increased to 100 KB?
One last thought, think Pentax might host it? Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Mustarde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 8:24 AM Subject: Re: NEW_PUG - questions > On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:30:23 +0200, you wrote: > > > >I think these are enough questions to start the ball rolling. > > > >Cheers > >Jostein and Adelheid > > I too appreciate your continuing commitment and efforts. > > I can live with "pdml-pug.net". > > Other suggestions: "pugphoto" and "photopug" are available. > > I am willing to leave the final decision in the capable hands of > Adelheid and Jostein, and will support them fully. > > As for helping with the annual costs for a new PUG server, count me > in. I don't send a photo to pug very often, but it is something I > enjoy and support. However, I don't use PayPal, so I would appreciate > an alternate method of transferring an annual contribution. > > I would like to vote for an uncluttered, clean, fast interface that > simply frames and enhances the photos, with space for a bit of > descriptive text. Leave off any extra graphics from the photo display > pages - no need for a PUG logo at the top or blinking gifs or any of > the distracting elements seen at photo.net and other photo display > sites. In other words, please stay close to the current PUG. > > -- > John Mustarde > www.photolin.com >
