Actually yes, yes I do.  They're not plaintext, they're in the src field for an img tag.

Please check whether the eighty consecutive characters are part of a URL before scolding the poster and blocking them from posting.  Thank you.
This message was last edited by the user at 17:17, Thu 21 Mar.

Second that. It's quite a nuisance on the rare occasion that I want to post a link to an image with a ludicrously long URL. I end up having to break up the link and advise anyone who wants to look that they need to copy and paste the plaintext URL and remove the space halfway through, and who in their right mind is going to bother going to even that much trouble?

@Rathmun, you're talking about displaying the image rather than merely posting a link, right? If so have you considered using an image host that provides less onerous URLs? I assume you are hosting them somewhere rather than simply displaying the image directly from its original source, since the latter action ("bandwidth theft") is - at best - frowned upon here.
This message was last edited by the user at 09:30, Fri 22 Mar.

tinyurl.com

It will give you a short link you can use.

I use post image. Sometimes I just have to select a different photo in those cases...I have gotten that message as well. It's a pain, but the way around it is either find a different image or make it a different size...like on post image it gives you the option to select the size.

Seconding this, tinyurl is a godsend. I use it constantly in my day job.

If the site has a "Share" button that generates an img tag as one of the options, I'm pretty sure they're okay with you using it.  (And the ultra-long base 64 string in the URL is probably for tracking purposes.  The same image probably has a million different strings that go to it, so they know who's sharing what.)

Otherwise I usually use postimg.cc, which has nicely short URL's.
This message was last edited by the user at 05:36, Sun 24 Mar.

Does the Share button generate an IMG tag or just a URL ?  The former you might assume (I wouldn't but ...) gives permission to use their bandwidth, the latter would seem to imply they were expecting you just to link to their page to see it.

Besides, if you link to an image you don't host yourself, you have absolutely no control over any changes to that image - change of policy or site ownership and who knows what you'll find yourself showing (yes, you have the same problem with a link but it's one step removed and only visible when clicked upon).

Note also that RPoL prohibits directly linking to images you don't host.  Per the FAQ | General RPoL Information | RuBB Code Tips and Tricks | How do I... Put pictures in a post?


At any rate, if anyone wants a code change to allow >80 chars in a link (or IMG tag, for that matter), you'll need to put in a request in the RPoL Development forum for jase's consideration.
This message was last edited by the user at 06:52, Sun 24 Mar.

It's an img tag.  It uses a number of parameters that RPoL doesn't support, which the host probably expects to work, but it's still an img tag.

I ended up sticking it on postimg.cc anyway to get around the 80 character limit, but it would've been nice to avoid needing to.