" 
 :Question 2 (the first one): Not particularly. When loading an image that is smaller than the full resolution, I believe that most browsers will load the full image size and shrink it for the thumbnail (not 100% sure, and I'm sure it varies from browser to browser). I just didn't want to make the image so tall that there is a large amount of white space above and below the text. If there was a gain, it would be negligable anyway. 
 :Question 2 (the second one): The image in question is a .SVG file. The nature of a Scalable Vector Graphics means that larger or smaller images are completely unnecessary: the image quality and size are the same at every conceivable resolution of the thumbnail. Not to mention that manually swapping them out would take months, even a bot would take many days to complete such a task. 
 :Question 3: We could, but I'm not at all convinced that it would be worth doing. The current solution works perfectly fine, and I don't see any potential gain for the amount of tedious man-hours it would take to replace the current usage. Of course, if you know somebody who would be willing to program a bot, then I might make a template for it to use; but I would expect your help in fixing any false positives the bot mindlessly created. ''''''  "