[thesite] comments on test.evolt.org

.jeff jeff at members.evolt.org
Thu Jun 28 00:01:08 CDT 2001


djc,

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: From: Daniel J. Cody
:
: > let's say we implement the style changer.
: > i'd say that's a pretty serious departure
: > from your statement above.
:
: which stylechanger?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

the one we've been talking about implementing so users can implement their
own schemes for viewing evolt.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: why would someone be using a stylechanger in ns3?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

well, they wouldn't because there would be no benefit of doing so.  that
goes back to my point though.  knowing they won't (can't) use it -- doesn't
that mean we're developing something in thesite for only a portion of our
audience and not for *everyone*?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > instead of just snipping it and dismissing my
: > points as a tantrum, why don't you take a look
: > at them and address them?  i'm not sure i know
: > anymore
:
: my fault. how do I address "shit, that'd make html
: v4 a waste as well.  while we're at it, let's throw
: out images too" ? with counter-sarcasm?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i agree, i took my example to an extreme.  however, it was in an effort to
show the extreme of your opinion.  we can't do all things for everyone.
what we can do is have a base that serves everyone and then build upon that
as an enhanced experience for those with the capability.  is that sort of
approach really so wrong?  <sarcasm>if it is then why don't we just offer
thesite in a text-only format so it's the same for everyone (albeit probably
less usable).</sarcasm>

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > sorry you see more valid points (maybe poorly
: > presented) as a rebellion.
:
: when i see "am i considering adding my richtext
: editor as an optional tool for submitting articles.
: you better f*cking believe it." and go on to bash
: mozilla/ns/scripting/whatever, it does come off as
: rebelious jeff. and i didnt, and still dont see,
: any valid points in there.. just frustration
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

look past the frustration.  i offered the comment about the scripted editing
environment in nn6 to let you know that i wasn't trying to implement win/ie
only features.  it was to let you know that i am aware of potential
solutions for users of other browsers (and possibly platforms) and would be
happy to implement them if they were available.  i'm frustrated by mozilla's
lack of direction with that regard.  i'd love to have something like that
available in mozilla.  i'm also frustrated that i'm being portrayed as such
a hardnose one-browser/one-platform developer when that's so far from the
truth.  dig?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: the difference between that and this is we had a
: plan of what features we were adding and we had
: eachother(me, you, rudy) there to bounce ideas
: off.  you didn't just go ramming whatever you
: wanted into that version, and thats the difference
: between then and now
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

did we have a list of features?  yeah, sorta.  did all the coding happen
when we were around to bounce ideas off of each other?  some of it, but not
all of it.  alot of it got started, but when it came time to finish up, i
did it here, by myself and made the decisions without having others to
bounce them off of.

there are lots of things in thesite that were never part of the proposed
featurelist and yet useful and even necessary.  the admin bar for example.
being able to minimize the sidebar.  user searches.  comment searches.
being able to change the author (while problematic i agree) of an article or
publish an article under another user's name.  a much improved search
interface for articles.  the comment block for explaining why an article is
being update.  the improved article submission process.  etc.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: what if everyone here agrees that its not a good
: idea except you?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

then so be it, but that's not what i hear.

furthermore, the arguments i've heard against it don't warrant not
implementing.  they only warrant good reason why some of you won't use it.
however, if it's included is it going to negatively impact your viewing
experience -- highly unlikely.  if that's a safe bet, then really what's all
the fuss about?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: is it still utopian bullshit because you're one
: who thinks it is a good idea?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

no, the utopian bullshit is the notion that everyone is going to agree on
something.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: we're not trying to please everyone either and
: we do go as a majority.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

yeah i know, but it's always the vocal majority.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: as for this affecting other work, wtf? its not
: like you said, "Ok, well as soon as I write this
: new feature up and implement it and defend it i'm
: going to finish working on that select box"
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

huh?  how do you know the select box issue wasn't the next thing i was going
to work on?

and what's this notion that i thought this idea up all by myself and
implemented it without input from others?

further, maybe it was naive of me to think that something like this might
actually get some positive feedback, but i didn't assume that i'd end up
defending it.  who knew, eh?  i guess i'll keep that in mind next time
somebody comes up with what seems like a good idea.  "naw, can't help you do
that, i'll catch a bunch of shit for implementing it, sorry, hope you
understand".

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: you choose to use your time to do this latest
: feature, and its not anyones fault here if we
: feel the need to question said latest feature.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

fine -- it's on the floor to be questioned.  seriously though, those of you
against it sure have alot of emotion wrapped in *not* implementing new
things.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: thanks for responding to that particular question
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

you're welcome.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > again ... am i on the clock when i take time
: > for evolt and expected to answer to someone
: > else's higher call of priority?
:
: who said you're on a clock? my point was that
: you were complaining about not having time to
: finish up other things, yet you had the time
: do jump in and write this latest thing. how you
: manage your time is your choice, i was just
: pointing out that you're contradicting yourself..
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i think you're completely missing my point, but that's ok.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: let me clarify for you; other people on this list
: (and not on this list) do just as much work as you
: on evolt.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

thanks for qualifying the time i put in.  you're not here -- seeing my
comings and goings.  how do you know how much time i spend on it.  really --
let's not get into nitpicking details about who does more and how often.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: Don't be suprised when they get upset if you make
: changes without their input on something(evolt)
: that they spend as much time more/less than you.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

am i not entitled to feel the same way?  there have been plenty of other
things that have been done by others that were never put forward for my
input and some of them i don't agree with.  live and let live though, eh?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: so you'd say the 'get no input from other people
: first, just do it' is a better attitude? cus thats
: wrong. i'm not saying our process is without
: flaws, but i hardly see letting other people know
: wtf is going on before you put it on our website
: as a *bad* idea.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

no shit, but i didn't put it on our website.  i put it on a testing
environment.  furthermore, i implemented *someone* else's idea.  can you
please get off the trip that this was me doing something all by myself
without input from others.  that's hardly fair.

obviously, since i didn't get the input from the right people, there's
another unwritten rule that says i gotta run ideas (mine or others if i'm
going to implement them) by a *certain set* of people before implementing
them.  i'd like to know who this certain set of people is so i can make sure
to include them in all future discussions to avoid this sort of public
reaming again.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > i thought rule #1 is you don't build it on the
: > live site when we have a test site.  i thought
: > that the test site was for implementing ideas
: > like i helped with on this.  see the problem
: > with unspoken rules?
:
: cute
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

cute?  i was trying to be constructive.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: no one is making you get 'everyones' opinion first
: and you know it. what i'm saying is, 'hey, anyone
: else besides me and isac think this is a good idea?
: if so, i'll throw some shit up on t.e.o unless
: people think its a bad idea' doesn't take a lot of
: time
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

well, just so you know, it wasn't just me and isaac that were involved.
michele also had some input too.  it's difficult to include other people on
the spot like that.  i happened to have a small slot of time before going
home for the night.  if i'd put out the question for input from others
*before* working on it, it would have never been implemented, and could have
been another one of those good ideas that flushed down the shitter cause
nobody has time to build it now, the idea didn't get approved by the right
people, or whatever.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: i'm not sure why you think you're being attacked
: personally, but sorry you feel that way
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

glad to hear.  just so you know, it sure doesn't feel that way.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: i'm sorry if you aren't having fun right
: now, neither am i.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

wouldn't think you would be having fun.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: but you've got to respect everyone else here
: and all the work they do. its your choice.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

how have i disrespected anyone else here and the work they do?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: > like i said -- rules that aren't written
: > down are not rules.
:
: so what rules should we have? thoughts?
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i'd like to know what's in and out as far as development.

is dhtml ok?

is javascript ok?

etc.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: the only lambasting you got woulda been from me, and
: i didnt mean it that way.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

good to know.  didn't feel that way at the time.

i honestly was hoping for a much more positive response to the idea.  it
sucks when you put some time into something and everyone comes back and
tells you how much it sucks.  i agree that there are elements of it that can
be improved, but is it really as horrible as everyone is making it sound?

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: i'm trying to hold out the olive branch here
: instead of you and i trading endless replies
: to eachothers posts. i know that neither of us
: is going to back down from our opinions, and
: thats good.
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

you got that right.  ;)

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: i just want to make sure these things don't happen
: in the future, cus I know neither of us like it
: and would rather be doing cool shit like having
: sex and drinking. :)
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

sure, drinking with each other, but not the sex part.

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: so lets work something out i guess. i can understand
: where you're coming from totally. and i hope you
: understand where I'm coming from too. and everyone else..
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

mostly.  my frustration comes from thesite no longer really being my baby
where i can address issues and add features that others will find useful.

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/






More information about the thesite mailing list