«

"Lewis" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In message <hro7ja$f7v$>
> Jenn <> wrote:
>> OMG ... I'm a troll because my code isn't perfect????
>
> Perfect? No, it's not that it's not perfect, it's that it's bad.

No.. it isn't BAD ... it's not perfect and up to some validators standard.
It worked for what it was created to do, and was good enough for the client
.....

> Some of the sites look pretty good, unless your font size is set a
> little too large, then your tables just blow-up and the site looks
> terrible.

So? That still doesn't make me a TROLL, for goodness sakes.........

> You have expressed absolutely no interest in learning anything about why
> your code sucks, and it does honestly suck, so it's hard to take you at
> all seriously.

I've expressed no interest in being gang attacked by people I don't know who
feel they are God's gift to the html world. Lighten up. I didn't show
ya'll my links so you could rip them apart. I showed you some sites I
designed and built 5 to 10 yrs ago. If I wanted to, I would rip each one of
you equally just based on what I see visually, but I don't do that because
it's bad form and does nothing to accomplish good communication or
understanding. Why would anyone want to take the advice of people who all
they can do is attack you?

> Your sites could easily be standard compliant (or even a
> lot more compliant than they are) which would make them look good AND be
> functional if, for example, someone increases the font size because they
> can't read 10pt text.

That's nice, but they are all just examples of design and basic
functionality. They aren't meant to be perfect.

> The worst thing is that making some of those sites compliant would be
> pretty easy.

Maybe it would.. but why would I want ya'll advice at this point? I'd
probably more apt to listen to dorayme than the rest of you.
--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"Neredbojias" <> wrote in message
news: .net...
> On 02 May 2010, "Jenn" <> wrote:
>>> That's logical, and I think I do pretty much the same. It's been
>>> awhile, though, since I've used tables for anything besides that
>>> vertical middling thang but I'm about to come out with a page that
>>> has more of 'em than flies around grandma's ass! It's going to be
>>> the greatest coup since Virgil gave his leg a subconscious! Will
>>> report back soon...


>> well.. I'd like to see that site if you don't mind ... just
>> remember.. tables are your friend... tables are your friend .. keep
>> reciting that........ LOL


> I used to say that about frames. Anyway, the site is up and some of
> the bugs are even worked out of it. There are several tables (but
> don't expect it to be what you expect.)
> http://www.moviegnu.com

I like it .. loads quickly, too. Have you thought about using a pagination
script and putting the imgs into categories people can scroll through and
then having the target page load below the category images? That way people
would not have to leave the start page, and it would increase your time
spent on that page.... another idea... Possibly using slightly smaller
thumbnails, with a mouseover within that pagination script that would give
them a larger image and a tooltip text description of the image?

> If you or someone with virgin ie7 could check it in that, I'd
> appreciate it.
>

I'm using IE7 ...

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"Ben C" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On 2010-05-04, Jenn <> wrote:
>>
>> "Ed Mullen" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Jenn wrote:
>>
>>>> Now that I've been the target of ya'lls critiques, perhaps you can
>>>> now move on and chit chat about everything you think you're good at,
>>>> and I'll just sit back and read and see if I can make use of any of
>>>> it.....
>>
>>
>>>> So, what sort of sites have you built and did you get paid?
>>
>>
>>> Why does it matter if a Web page design was for contract/money?
>>
>> A turn about is fair play.. you have had your fun putting me down.... so
>> show me what you can do or NOT do.
>> Money makes the world go round, and if you can build the most perfect
>> code
>> in the world, but you can't make a dime off of it, it's pretty much
>> worthless to anyone else, but you.
>
> The point of all this "perfect code" (validating, trying to use things
> that are properly specified, not relying on browser quirks) is that it's
> supposed to make things easier and cheaper so you make more money.
>
> Time you spend trying to understand how things are supposed to work
> saves you much more time the next time you have a weird problem to fix
> and it takes 5 minutes instead of 5 days of guessing.


Thus far, I very rarely take longer than a few hours to fix any issue.
Designing new functionality into a complicated site that contains various
files that have to interact with each other is another story, tho. Getting
server code written by a committee to interact with aspx.config pages and
aspx pages and ascx pages and includes and video files, and rss feeds, and
flash files, etc, ad naseum .... can take a bit more time to figure out,
plus getting it to work on multiple browsers... BUT, once the code is
written and the interactivity is confirmed to work properly, it's used over
and over again.

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"Adrienne Boswell" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9D6EABAA5604arbpenyahoocom@81.169.183.62.. .
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Jenn"
> <> writing in
> news:hro7ja$f7v$:
>
>>
>> OMG ... I'm a troll because my code isn't perfect???? dang ... and I
>> was beginning to think this place had some nice people here.


> Jenn, this is Usenet, and you have to have a thick skin. Even though
> they sound harsh, they really are being nice, because they are trying to
> help you.

I seriously doubt that cursing at me is going to help me in any way shape or
form.... additionally, I'm fairly easy to get along with when people want to
interact and discuss just about anything. I really don't take kindly to
bullies or anyone who consider themselves to be God's gift to anything.
They aren't helping me at all... they are trying to bulldoze and bully me
into believing they are good at something, and in doing so they put me down
and what I have done in the past to earn a living they critique into
oblivian. Back off a little, if that is their intent.

> You will be a better designer, if you follow standards. Separate
> presentation from structure. Stop using deprecated elements and
> attributes, most of which have been replaced in favor of CSS.

I'm already a better designer than the people here who have shown me their
example websites.... that's just a fact. I really don't need to be here in
order to learn anything new because the web has anything I could ever
imaging I'd need, and all I have to do is search it out on the fly, and
walaa... I'm here because I thought it would be fun to interact with other
people who like building websites, and I don't really need anyone to tell me
what I do sucks. CSS isn't my first language, but I use it, and it's
interesting to learn more about it, but I don't need to immerse myself into
it to make a living.

> You have a good eye for design, but your sites are jerky when rendering.
> I looked at them using Opera, and they were slow to load.

I have an excellent eye for design.. always have. If you or anyone else
here thinks that 5 to 10 year old sites are the sum total of my skill set,
you're mistaken... and ragging on me about old sites will not make me open
up the any ideas ya'll may have.

> Since you are good at visual design, and like to cut up images, you
> might want to look into CSS sprites. There is an excellent article
> about it at http://www.alistapart.com/articles/sprites.
>

Thanks....... I'll take a look.

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"dorayme" <> wrote in message
news:dorayme-...
> In article <Xns9D6EABAA5604arbpenyahoocom@81.169.183.62>,
> Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:
>
>> Jenn, this is Usenet, and you have to have a thick skin. Even though
>> they sound harsh, they really are being nice, because they are trying to
>> help you.
>
> Adrienne, you have just made me spill my wine over the desk. You
> cannot see that some here want to dismember her and eat her
> liver! There is a famous model for being as optimistic as you,
> namely Dr. Pangloss from Voltaire's Candide. <g>
>


ROFLOL ... I REALLY do like you!! haaaaaahaha
--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"Lewis" <> wrote in message
news:...

>When people started to point out the specific shortcomings
> of her code she responded with "that was 10 years ago" which is not at
> all useful. Also, not true since her main page, carrying a 2010 date, is
> just as badly written as all the others.

hello..... have you ever heard of javascript? That date you refer to is
set by a javascript that applies the copyright date based on the current
year. I could leave that sample site up for 25 years and it would still
show the current year.

> Several of us have acknowledged that her LOOK is pretty decent, but no
> one here is going to praise the HTML code she's using to produce it as
> it fails from the very first line.

Well... you really make me want to give a rip ... LOL


> The more she posts the clearer it becomes that she's only ever used a
> single browser (IE) to view her sites, that she believes that 'good
> enough' is the same as 'pride in one's work', and that any time anyone
> points out her errors her response is going to be "I got paid LOL".

wrong ...


> She keeps repeating that she'd making money doing this, which is not
> relevant; she's gone so far as to say outright that if you aren't making
> money you don't count, which I find odd from someone who claims to be a
> Xian, not to mention her 'black-eye' comment which, of course, puts her
> in direct opposition to the teachings of the religious figure she claims
> to follow.

Would you like to have a discussion of what it means to be a Christan and
the false idea that one has to be a wimpy weak and frail submissive step on
me any time you want type of human being? You wouldn't win that that debate.


> I haven't kill-filed her as a troll yet, but I am starting to suspect
> that she is a troll and is not here for any purpose but to cause strife
> and discord.
>

yahooo .... I won't have to listen to your whinning anymore.

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"rf" <> wrote in message
news:vrRDn.22928$...
>
> "Jenn" <> wrote in message
>>>>> cross-platform.
>>>>> Ya gotta work at it to make it IE only. Geez.


>>>> hey now.. considering that was the first flash example I ever tried.. I
>>>> thought I did quite well.

>>> No you did not. Frankly, you totally ****ed it up. Any Flash page can
>>> be easily made compatible with every browser. You just don't know how.


>> Gee.. I bet you are a hoot at parties, weddings and funerals.

> I bet he doesn't walk into a girl scout camp-out and **** on the
> camp-fire, as you seem to have done.

Excuse me ... I grew up and was a girl scout for 12 yrs and went camping
many times and have never done such a thing and never would even consider
doing it. You have a rather foul mind.

> We are professionals here. Well, a lot of us are anyway. You waltz in and
> state flat-out that the tools we have been using to very good effect for
> years are so much mumbo-jumbo that you, preciously, don't need to take any
> notice of. Are you surprised that someone takes a poke at you?

Pardon me again ... but you mentioned no tools but validators, and I see no
need for them, and your response to me was to shove it down my throat
verbally. Now, THAT's going to make me want to accept your tools.. isn't
it?


> As an example, that site you coded five years ago using last millennium
> code and flyspeck sized fonts. Say your client suddenly goes a bit blind
> and asks you to make the font a little larger. What do you do? Wade
> through thousands of lines of code looking for every single deprecated
> font element to change the size. What would any one of us do? Change one
> single line of code in our CSS file.

yes... that's what I did 5 to 10 yrs ago before I knew such a thing as CSS
existed... today I would consult the style sheet.

> Your customer gives you one of those big fat paychecks to have her font
> size changed.

Fat paychecks? no ... payment for work done to their satisfaction...?
Yes......


> Mine? It'd take me twelve seconds and I'd probably do it as a goodwill
> gesture. Cost to me: 12 seconds. Cost to client: $0. Income to me: the big
> fat paycheck for the next site she asks me to produce that she knows will
> last for a goodly long time without any further "fixing".

Payment for me is also future work.


>
> So with my web sites. I plug in the validator and it tells me what is
> wrong with them (usually typos) that might cause problems for today's and
> tomorrows browsers.

Your method of attempting to convince me to use validators only convinces me
that only jerks use them.

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"freemont" <> wrote in message
news:a8eb7$4be00ccd$6216f11c$...
> On Mon, 03 May 2010 23:25:27 -0500, Jenn writ:
>
>> OMG ... I'm a troll because my code isn't perfect???? dang ... and I
>> was beginning to think this place had some nice people here.

> Did I not tell you four days ago that this is exactly what would happen
> if you pressed the issue? Didn't I? Now, will you at least /try/ to
> listen and learn, if you're going to participate here and elsewhere in
> USENET?

Oh .. gee ... I wouldn't listen to most of you guys if you paid me to do it.
I'm not that hard up for advice. I'd rather listen to dorayme because
he/she (not sure) talks to me as a human being.


> I mean, you are thicker than a dadgum brick, but just TRY to
> listen, and learn. This is a technical newsgroup, and by nature technical
> people who frequent technical newsgroups are concerned with technical
> things, like html markup. You want nice, cuddly people to hold your hand
> and tell you how great your sites are? Call your clients.

And you have no skill at design, you're boring, and have no people skills to
speak of. How do you manage to get any work at all with those personality
issues?

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

"Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote in message
news:hrp4uh$60u$...
> Jenn wrote:
>
>> It's totally boring to look at, and despite you had a female CEO... she
>> evidently had little talent for creating something feminine for women. I
>> could help you with that!
>
> Not if it did not work for nearly 40% of the visitors, and a #$^% to
> maintain--I'll pass. I'll agree on the style, believe it or not that was
> the most I could get her away from the purple. Not Victoria Secrets but
> her clientele is more matured and settled...
>


Hey ... I'd say I qualify to judge whether or not a site would appeal to
women or not.
--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/

Jenn wrote:

> "Lewis" wrote:
>> When people started to point out the specific shortcomings of her
>> code she responded with "that was 10 years ago" which is not at all
>> useful. Also, not true since her main page, carrying a 2010 date, is
>> just as badly written as all the others.
>
> hello..... have you ever heard of javascript? That date you refer
> to is set by a javascript that applies the copyright date based on
> the current year. I could leave that sample site up for 25 years and
> it would still show the current year.

I believe Lewis is referring to your site http://pqlr.org/
Your copyright year does not display at all for those with JavaScript
disabled. "Copyright ©" which looks silly.

However, the page's headers contradict your claim that "it's ok to have
old code because it is ... old."

Last-Modified: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:46:27 GMT

Your copyright notice should actually read: Copyright © 1995-2010
(or whatever the appropriate beginning year is).

--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul