This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

There's trouble at the mill..

edited May 2008 in Forum Stuff
Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
This is
the wrong way.
This is
the right way.

Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.
TrogdorTheIron ChefwrongTrogdorwayStrongbadtoIron ChefdoStrongbadthings.
The right way to do
Strongbadthings.
You could just not bother quoting and use your writing skills to make it clear that you are replying.

Thirdly, try not to make such ambiguous thread titles (such as shown in this one) people should be able to tell at a glance what something is about. Go for clear and simple over witty and intriguing.
The wrong way to do thingsSaw something odd on the way to work
The right way to do thingsSaw a giant octopus on the side of an office building today.
Thank you for reading and please remember to re-read your posts after you make them; The the edit link does not lead to dishonor.

Comments

  • edited May 2008
    There's already a post on this dude...
    Thirdly, try not to make such ambiguous thread titles
    Not even for humor's sake? I strongly disagree.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • edited May 2008
    This is just a reminder, things have been getting sloppy recently.
    Two full stops to an ellipse too. Good point Sail, I'll go dig up some examples of what I think is too ambiguous.
    Ok, example: "Gear thread" could have meant anything (I was expecting art equipment) so even changing it to something like "Musical gear tread" would have been an improvement.
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
    This is
    the wrong way.
    This is
    the right way.

    Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.
    The
    wrong
    way
    to
    do
    things.
    The right way to do
    things.
    You could just not bother quoting and use your writing skills to make it clear that you are replying.

    Thirdly, try not to make such ambiguous thread titles (such as shown in this one) people should be able to tell at a glance what something is about. Go for clear and simple over witty and intriguing.
    Saw something odd on the way to work
    Saw a giant octopus on the side of an office building today.
    Thank you for reading and please remember to re-read your posts after you make them; The the edit link does not lead to dishonor.


    Wait, what?
  • edited May 2008
    Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
    This is
    the wrong way.
    This is
    the right way.

    Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.

    Thewrongwaytodothings.
    The right way to do
    things.
    You could just not bother quoting and use your writing skills to make it clear that you are replying.

    Thirdly, try not to make such ambiguous thread titles (such as shown in this one) people should be able to tell at a glance what something is about. Go for clear and simple over witty and intriguing.
    Saw something odd on the way to work
    Saw a giant octopus on the side of an office building today.
    Thank you for reading and please remember to re-read your posts after you make them; The the edit link does not lead to dishonor.


    Wait, what?
    Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
    This is
    the wrong way.
    This is
    the right way.

    Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.But, I lol'd. [Missed part of the bottom off.]
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
    This is
    the wrong way.
    This is
    the right way.

    Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.

    Thewrongwaytodothings.
    The right way to do
    things.
    You could just not bother quoting and use your writing skills to make it clear that you are replying.

    Thirdly, try not to make such ambiguous thread titles (such as shown in this one) people should be able to tell at a glance what something is about. Go for clear and simple over witty and intriguing.
    Saw something odd on the way to work
    Saw a giant octopus on the side of an office building today.
    Thank you for reading and please remember to re-read your posts after you make them; The the edit link does not lead to dishonor.


    Wait, what?
    Now that I have your attention I would like to remind you of two things, firstly that the < /blockquotes> tag adds a break so, while it may look easier when writing, you should not drop down to the next line or you end up with a stupid looking gap.
    This is
    the wrong way.
    This is
    the right way.

    Secondly, if you are replying to the post above, you need not quote the whole thing. If you want to make it clear that you are specifically replying (when it isn't obviously noticeable) quoting a well chosen sentence will do. Quoting a quote of a quote of a quote and then saying "I llol'd" isn't needed. You could also experiment with using a blank quote box and just the leaving the "< cite>" section.But, I lol'd.

    I'm sorry, I still don't know what you are trying to get at here.

    Do you think you could be a little more verbose?
  • Ok, no more. This is just getting silly.
  • edited May 2008
    SCREENSTRETCHERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRlolRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111

    /obnoxious
    Ok, example: "Gear thread" could have meant anything (I was expecting art equipment) so even changing it to something like "Musical gear tread" would have been an improvement.
    A "Music" category would fix this, *hinthint* >_>

    But seriously, I don't see how this is really a big problem. Boo-hoo, you lose maybe 2 seconds of your time.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • edited May 2008
    How about expanding the "Art" section to "Creativity"?
    If 30 people loose two seconds that's a whole man-minute.
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • edited May 2008
    Boo-hoo, you lose maybe 2 seconds because of something like this?
    That's very true in itself, but let's turn that logic around... Boo-hoo, the threadmaker loses maybe 5-10 seconds by making a better thread title.

    As for ambiguous titles, after going through the first 7 pages of the forum, I found only 2 that I would consider questionable, and questionable at most (Gear and Metal, FYI).
    Post edited by Dkong on
  • It isn't much of an issue but we're so good already that that extra bit of polish[?] would complete the look.
Sign In or Register to comment.