Just a few observations on some of the points raised - those where real discussion is desired will be moved into specific threads.
1) Capitalisation of ships' names
It is true that the vast majority of ships' names are in all-caps on ships themselves. But this is just a matter of tradition and, in some places, national registration law. There are indeed some exceptons where owners have themselved adopted something different for individual styling or branding preference - including cursive scripts, some miniscule words, misplaced full stops and hyphens etc. None of this is directly relevant to what we do on here.
This has been discussed several times before; and the site's guidance was revised in the light of the last round to reflect the division of opinionhttp://www.shipspotting.com/support/faq.php?category=How%20to%20Upload%20Photos#76
Whether a name has capitals or not makes no difference to a name search - devonia, Devonia, DEVONIA, DEVoniA etc all produce the same 35 photos. But I agree that the drop-down lists are a pain as they are, and must be improved (at the very least to prevent the actual search button being hidden by the drop-downs).
Anyway, I'll put this subject in a separate thread so that others can give their views.
That certainly should be improved - I assume that it is common issue (I don't experience it at all, but that may be an Admin thing). I've put this on my list for IT.
3 Use of ENI numbers
Will take this up - it's attractive in principle, but there might be some technical issues (eg where ships have both IMO and ENI numbers) - and it is only relatively recently that ENI numbers became "unique for life" like IMO numbers.
4 (New) Summary page
More importantly this needs improvement so that each name the ship has had can be selected individually
5 Auto-reading Captured date
Interesting idea. A definite help if technically feasible. It's on the list!
6 Limits on numbers of photos
This subject actually has many facets and has always proved highly contentious. Frankly I'd like to park this one for a little while (but won't forget!). But in the meantime I will check with IT whether there are underlying bandwidth issues for the new site
7 Identifying photographers
I assume that this is effectively adding a discreet watermark. The site at present does not favour watermarks, but does allow subject to limitations. A tool to be able to add them in the circumstances described could be considered
8 Upgrading project
Dealing with the various security issues that have arisen over the last year or too is one of the fundamental reasons for the upgrade. The intention is to bring it fully up to modern standards.
We are only at the beginning of the process and my expectation is that it will be some months before a parallel site will be ready for trials. I will keep you informed.If you want to comment further on any of these points, please open a specific Subject thread - I can copy over what has already been said here. All discussions here will be evaluated by the Admin team in liaison with the site development managers (IT)
Meanwhile, thanks for your wise advice, Emmanuel - now just waiting for your list!