Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Arantor
6601
Off-topic / Re: IE users are dumb
« on August 28th, 2011, 09:19 PM »
Quote
There's always got to be a Troll around: not contributing to the post, but trying to hurt peoples feelings.
I love the taste of irony in the afternoon.
6602
Off-topic / Re: Doctor Who
« on August 28th, 2011, 09:11 PM »
(click to show/hide)
Quite simply, it hasn't happened for her yet. She is, as far as she knows, still Melody Pond. (The ending in the college, I don't think it said her name)

The place where she goes, where "the only water in the forest is a river", that hasn't happened yet - in either Melody's current timeline (her future, River's past) or the Doctor's, as evidenced in AGMGTW because the person who comes from there, who ran with the Doctor, she's now dead, it's in her past - their future.

Essentially, she's still Melody Pond, new to her current body, and all the events that happen between her leaving the hospital and her becoming an archaeologist have yet to happen, since the archaeology is ultimately the last thing she does. Her "becoming" River Song is yet to happen.

Also: that bit that the Doctor whispered to Melody, for "when you find River", that has to be the Doctor's real name. After all, "there's only one reason I would ever tell anyone my real name, there's only one time I ever could." (Forest of the Dead) If dying, sans regeneration, isn't enough of a reason, I don't know what is.

The exposition in AGMGTW where River (adult) tells Amy, Rory and the Doctor who she is, is definitely a long time after the events just unfolded.

The other clue that she's not yet truly River as we know her is that the first meeting hasn't yet come to pass. "You showed up, new haircut and a suit, and you knew all about me." We're not quite there yet, nor have we seen the final time they meet, from his point of view, at the singing towers of Darillium, where he is said to have cried, and as she later recounts, "because you knew it was my time, my time to come to the library. You even gave me your screwdriver, that should have been the first clue."

Non-spoiler version: there's a lot that's happened, it answers a lot of questions and it sets up stuff still to come. We know who River Song is now, we're just waiting for a little bit more about how she came to be the woman we've seen for the past couple of years.
6603
Off-topic / Re: Doctor Who
« on August 28th, 2011, 05:41 PM »
No, that part was already pretty much clear from the first episode of season 6.

(click to show/hide)
After River tries to shoot the astronaut suit and it doesn't work, she makes a comment that "of course, it wouldn't", because she knows it's herself...
6604
Off-topic / Re: Doctor Who
« on August 28th, 2011, 12:06 AM »
I just checked in with one fan community I'm a member of. Some of the comments are hilarious like 'if this is what Doctor Who has become, RIP.' and lovely sentiments like that.

It's pretty much your classic Moffat midpoint. A lot of questions answered, but a few more still to deal with, because what happened at the start of the season is still going to happen.

(click to show/hide)
And one group assert that it is a fixed point in space and time. So therefore it must always happen. Oh dear, this could get interesting.
6605
Off-topic / Re: Doctor Who
« on August 27th, 2011, 11:57 PM »
OK, so season 6 part 2 is officially here.

It tells an awful lot.

(click to show/hide)
We now know:
* who the little girl regenerating was at the start of the season.
* what happens between Melody/River at a young age and 'adulthood'
* a bit more about the Silents.
* how River comes to learn to fly the TARDIS, and how she learned from 'the very best' because the Doctor was 'busy that day'.
* how River ends up in the 51st Century as her 'home time'.
* where she gets the TARDIS-like diary from.
* how she begins to become an archaeologist.

And all this while dealing with an actual primary plot that isn't exactly unrelated (but not entirely related) to the above. Phew. Hell of an episode.
6606
Off-topic / Re: IE users are dumb
« on August 27th, 2011, 07:48 PM »
*nods* I was agreeing with you :P I don't believe the Hackintosh installer likes it much and I know some Apple apps refuse to run though.
6607
The Pub / Re: Jump box and its stupid Go button
« on August 27th, 2011, 06:14 PM »
Um, what's here is what SMF itself does... This site does not yet run Wedge.
6608
Off-topic / Re: IE users are dumb
« on August 27th, 2011, 06:12 PM »
Not particularly reliably. Like I said, some stuff will work just fine, some won't and some will be temperamental. A fair amount depends on how it was compiled, stuff compiled from the likes of gcc will likely be more stable and less glitchy, because it's not compiled with Intel specific optimisations for the most part.
6609
Plugins / [Naming poll] Re: Packages
« on August 27th, 2011, 10:17 AM »
Quote
That is admittedly a big problem of SMF. Of course, Wedge addon authors would probably drop  their creations, since they'd like to hit and run
*shrug* Not our problem. I know I'll be beefing up our <insert extension-of-software name> repository though.
Quote
but one of Wedge's goals is to try to alleviate that problem by making them largely version independent. Or such is the plan...
Yes, that's the plan. File edits are still going to be fragile where used, but for the most part it should be possible to extend stuff without needing to keep up on maintenance.
6610
The Pub / Re: Jump box and its stupid Go button
« on August 26th, 2011, 06:38 PM »
In other news.

I swear I mentioned this somewhere else, actually, that there's a problem with the jumpto box not operating as expected (even if it does actually function) on touch devices, on the basis of the onclick not issuing a blur.

Well, it seems that someone else has pointed out the same bug in SMF - http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=450285.0
6611
Development blog / Re: Anniwersary
« on August 26th, 2011, 04:03 PM »
Quote
That's because it imports the db, not file edits, no?
Correct.
Quote
Yep... Of course these tweaks are gone. But they can be re-implemented.
Of course they can. Odds are we'll do at least as cleanly as before, if not more cleanly :)
6612
Other software / Re: Baibai vblamer
« on August 26th, 2011, 04:01 PM »
Quote
Trying to get the hang of 'proper' English by the book... This is 'whom' here not 'who', right?
(I do not use the two terms correctly most of the time, for the record. 'who' is typically much easier for most people to digest, regardless of 'correctness')

It's almost like object orientated programmed >_< Specifically it gets into the distinction between the subject and object of the question.

'Who caused the drama' - the object of the question is the drama (because it's the result of doing something), and the subject is the person doing it.

There is a method that generally nails it, actually. If you could substitute 'he' into the question to get the answer, it's 'who' (because you're asking about the subject). If however you could substitute 'him' into the question to get the answer, it's 'whom' (because you're asking about the object). Easy mnemonic[1]: him = whom, he without an m = who without an m.

So, back to the question... 'depends on whom the drama was coming from.' From whom was the drama coming. The person is the object of the question, the drama the subject, so it IS whom in that case.[2]

Thus ends today's English lesson.
 1. Odd that such a word should itself generally need a mnemonic because it's a PITA to spell.
 2. Of course, reword the question to 'Who caused the drama', the drama is now the object, the person the subject, so 'who' is correct there.
6613
Development blog / Re: Anniwersary
« on August 26th, 2011, 03:48 PM »
Even with all the custom tweaks you've made to RC4's core :P
6614
Other software / Re: Baibai vblamer
« on August 26th, 2011, 03:35 PM »
Quote
I think what killed SMF was that the entire original team had left at some point.
Sure, there's attrition in any environment, but I think the problem wasn't so much that the original team left, but more that who came after weren't necessarily the best group of people all together.

I'm not going to lay the blame at any individual or group of individuals, but I think the total group dynamic made it very hard to remain enthusiastic about doing anything, and that increased the burn rate.

At the top, there needs to be someone with charisma and enthusiasm - and passion, even if that means there's drama attached, it means that someone cares enough to be passionate about it, and I didn't see passion towards the end of my time on sm.org, I just saw drama for drama's sake.
6615
Development blog / Re: Anniwersary
« on August 26th, 2011, 02:24 PM »
Oh, the point didn't go unnoticed ;) Just that people have seen the RCs as intermediate releases and have actually been known to ask what new features there are.