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
811
Off-topic / Re: Surviving Your Competitor
« on May 4th, 2013, 01:01 AM »
I'd start by wondering why I entered such a niche.
I'd then start looking at what I could offer that the other sites aren't offering, because if I can't offer something unique to my site (that people want to come and see) there is no reason why they would come to my site rather than the well established site.
I'd then start looking at what I could offer that the other sites aren't offering, because if I can't offer something unique to my site (that people want to come and see) there is no reason why they would come to my site rather than the well established site.
812
Features: Theming / Re: CSS caching
« on May 4th, 2013, 12:25 AM »Note for later: if it seems like an easy change in Wess, DON'T DO IT. Even if the current product is buggy, as long as you don't see it, it's alright!
(It's the computer equivalent of 'if a tree falls in a forest and no-one was around to see it, what colour was it?' Herman Toothrot owes me a lot for that one.)
813
Other software / Re: My review of customer service on SMF
« on May 3rd, 2013, 08:08 PM »
If he replaced all the files, it would PUT THE SPACES BACK! *applause all round*
814
Other software / Re: My review of customer service on SMF
« on May 3rd, 2013, 05:10 PM »
I don't care what the hidden links were about. I kind of object to posting links to hidden resources here if you're not going to explain what the link is about or why it is relevant. Had the links mentioned what they were talking about, at least two snide comments here would have been avoided.Quote The posts were deleted in, what, 2011? xrunner's been around SMF - albeit quietly - longer than that.Quote I wanted to quote the whole thing to answer the whole point. Us mere mortals here have no context. To us it just appeared to be a link discussing this matter - because we have no other context to come to any other conclusion. xrunner's reaction is the same as mine on this one; it's a link to a hidden board, posted in the midst of an argument. Outside observers who cannot see the link would typically assume it is related directly to the matter at hand, not a smaller side matter.
It's not being 'at the centre of the world', it's making an assumption based on a lack of evidence and not an unfair assumption given what context us mere mortals have. Don't be disingenuous.
I'm well aware how all the parties seem to see their respective positions, and you'll notice I haven't exactly gone all gung-ho on this because frankly it's a waste of time all around. It's fairly clear there is a two tier environment around sm.org, and there is a lot of speculation and conjecture as to why that might be, but what is clear are what the consequences are: that it is one rule for some people and one rule for everyone else.
I still not believe xrunner has gone any further 'overboard' than I have in the past and with a far greater level of rebuke than anything I'd seen myself. In short, I do believe this has been blown out of proportion, and that xrunner has a point. I won't defend it to its fullest extent, because while I believe he has a valid grievance, I don't believe it is entirely as bad as he has stated, but there IS a problem. (And it is a problem, as opposed to an aesthetic difference.)
The heart of it comes back to the point I have made time and again: why should people receive the answer to their question, if they're asking the wrong question?
How many times have I refused to answer someone's question because I don't believe that what they're doing is in the best interest of their community? This is, at its heart, no different, even if it is only an aesthetic matter. The correct question after "I have a problem" is "why is it a problem?" unless the problem by definition can be obviously and clearly seen to be a problem by its nature. Something not working as expected isn't necessarily a problem, it could be a matter of a difference of expectation between the user and the designer. (This has happened to me enough times, where a user is trying to use something in a way inconsistent with how it was designed to be used, and reported it as a bug when it is not.)
which predates your involvement in SMF in any way shape or form.
ummm... I'll point out one thing. The link emanuele pointed to was regarding the conversation ARANTOR and I were having. which predates your involvement in SMF in any way shape or form.
You're not the center of the world.
It's not being 'at the centre of the world', it's making an assumption based on a lack of evidence and not an unfair assumption given what context us mere mortals have. Don't be disingenuous.
I'm well aware how all the parties seem to see their respective positions, and you'll notice I haven't exactly gone all gung-ho on this because frankly it's a waste of time all around. It's fairly clear there is a two tier environment around sm.org, and there is a lot of speculation and conjecture as to why that might be, but what is clear are what the consequences are: that it is one rule for some people and one rule for everyone else.
I still not believe xrunner has gone any further 'overboard' than I have in the past and with a far greater level of rebuke than anything I'd seen myself. In short, I do believe this has been blown out of proportion, and that xrunner has a point. I won't defend it to its fullest extent, because while I believe he has a valid grievance, I don't believe it is entirely as bad as he has stated, but there IS a problem. (And it is a problem, as opposed to an aesthetic difference.)
The heart of it comes back to the point I have made time and again: why should people receive the answer to their question, if they're asking the wrong question?
How many times have I refused to answer someone's question because I don't believe that what they're doing is in the best interest of their community? This is, at its heart, no different, even if it is only an aesthetic matter. The correct question after "I have a problem" is "why is it a problem?" unless the problem by definition can be obviously and clearly seen to be a problem by its nature. Something not working as expected isn't necessarily a problem, it could be a matter of a difference of expectation between the user and the designer. (This has happened to me enough times, where a user is trying to use something in a way inconsistent with how it was designed to be used, and reported it as a bug when it is not.)
815
Features: Theming / Re: CSS caching
« on May 3rd, 2013, 04:45 PM »* Arantor has no idea, never built replace skins.
816
Other software / Re: My review of customer service on SMF
« on May 3rd, 2013, 04:25 PM »
Play nice children.
817
Features: Theming / Re: CSS caching
« on May 3rd, 2013, 04:24 PM »
At least, not intentionally ;)
That's why the infractions system has been driving me mad, because it's not like I can deploy any of it and leave here without a functional warning system. Though, fortunately, we haven't had to use it much anyway (but you just know that if I broke it here, we'd end up having to warn people and stuff)
That's why the infractions system has been driving me mad, because it's not like I can deploy any of it and leave here without a functional warning system. Though, fortunately, we haven't had to use it much anyway (but you just know that if I broke it here, we'd end up having to warn people and stuff)
818
Features: Theming / Re: CSS caching
« on May 3rd, 2013, 03:42 PM »Can I commit "as is", and deal with plugins later..?
819
Off-topic / Re: The sites looking
« on May 3rd, 2013, 02:42 PM »
No, it came off as 'waaaah, I can't have Wedge yet because the devs care *too* much about quality'
820
Off-topic / Re: The sites looking
« on May 3rd, 2013, 05:21 AM »
You realise that such comments are not helpful, right?
821
The Pub / Re: I asked my people to take a look at Wedge
« on May 3rd, 2013, 03:06 AM »
I suppose the bracket links might be advantageous but they're only most useful if you have something with consistent normalised pages (like a wiki) to link to.
822
The Pub / Re: I asked my people to take a look at Wedge
« on May 3rd, 2013, 03:03 AM »
Given that wiki markup is a poor imitation of the power of bbcode...?
823
The Pub / Re: I asked my people to take a look at Wedge
« on May 3rd, 2013, 01:47 AM »Does the Karma you plan to have go beyond SMF's lack of accountability?
Likes is built in. A fuller reputation (like the "Advanced Reputation System" mod) is planned.
Then we'll deal with the members complaining about this is missing and that is a different color. But of course, they should be wowed by the new toys as an offset.
824
The Pub / Re: I asked my people to take a look at Wedge
« on May 3rd, 2013, 01:34 AM »
The more the merrier :)
If there are any mods that you're missing, let us know - while I doubt everything will get into the core, I do have a big ol' list of things that will become plugins too ;) So it's entirely possible that things you want to see either already exist or are planned to exist.
If there are any mods that you're missing, let us know - while I doubt everything will get into the core, I do have a big ol' list of things that will become plugins too ;) So it's entirely possible that things you want to see either already exist or are planned to exist.
825
Features: Theming / Re: CSS caching
« on May 3rd, 2013, 12:35 AM »
Sounds good to me, just I hope I won't have any changes to fix up in my code, I shouldn't have anything that will conflict though.