Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: OT: Opinions from web developers sought (Mac, Linux, Windows, whatever)

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Big Crotch on a Small Fish

unread,
Jan 10, 2011, 10:51:49 AM1/10/11
to
Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Jan 10, 8:07 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> Sandman stated in post mr-E17EA5.10034710012...@News.Individual.NET
>> on 1/10/11 2:03 AM:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <19e30c3a-9bf9-4c61-bf47-438cd5030...@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> The site:
>>
>>>> http://courseweb.yc.edu/csa144/mglasser/index.html
>>
>>> That is one ugly website... :(
>>
>> What, do you think, is the goal of that site?
>>
>> Carroll has made it clear he has *no* idea - and to try to cover
>> that he lies about me.
>
> Where's my lie?

Crickets chirping.

>> And, of course, you support that.
>
> He didn't say anything about anything else. So why are you lying about
> what he supports while calling someone else a liar with no proof of
> it?

Snit always lies.


--
You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch


Big Crotch on a Small Fish

unread,
Jan 10, 2011, 10:53:18 AM1/10/11
to
Snit wrote:
> Sandman stated in post mr-E17EA5.10...@News.Individual.NET on

> 1/10/11 2:03 AM:
>
>> In article
>> <19e30c3a-9bf9-4c61...@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,

>> Steve Carroll <fretw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The site:
>>>
>>> http://courseweb.yc.edu/csa144/mglasser/index.html
>>
>> That is one ugly website... :(
>>
> What, do you think, is the goal of that site?

To show off how much glue you sniff.

> Carroll has made it clear he has *no* idea - and to try to cover that
> he lies about me.
>

> And, of course, you support that.

--

Big Crotch on a Small Fish

unread,
Jan 11, 2011, 9:26:02 PM1/11/11
to
Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Jan 11, 7:01 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> Sandman stated in post mr-79643D.09014111012...@News.Individual.NET
>> on 1/11/11 1:01 AM:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article
>>> <61368dc7-9a97-4805-82a9-94a2a575c...@u25g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>>>> On Jan 10, 2:03 am, Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <19e30c3a-9bf9-4c61-bf47-438cd5030...@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> The site:
>>
>>>>>> http://courseweb.yc.edu/csa144/mglasser/index.html
>>
>>>>> That is one ugly website... :(
>>
>>>> Well, I wasn't gonna go there... still won't because of the
>>>> subjectivity. That said, I'm not gonna walk on eggs shells for
>>>> Snit or anyone else using DW so I'll ask you your opinion of
>>>> something that first crossed my mind on this:
>>
>>>> Do you think it's possible that a person using DW, who doesn't code
>>>> well manually, is more likely to encounter this kind of issue and
>>>> not be able to fix it (or, in Snit's case, believe it isn't
>>>> fixable)?
>>
>>>> My two cents: I've seen this stuff on a number of occasions.
>>
>>> If you mean the vertical scrollbar thing, then I think it's a moot
>>> point. There are few sites where a horizontal shift is that
>>> important to suppress.
>>
>> Right: but Steve decided to mock my *training* site based on my not
>> having it.
>
> I observed something that you subsequently came along and ridiculed me
> for... that being, for my belief that I could find a website that
> featured varying length content in its pages (some scrollable, some
> non-scrollable) that did not display the shifting, a thing you
> obviously didn't believe existed as you laughed at me and claimed I
> was "so amazingly lost" for believing such sites without shifting did
> exist.
>
> --
> "Can you find a website that is centered that does *not* do that,
> assuming some pages scroll and some do not. LOL!
>
> Poor Steve... so amazingly lost." - Snit
>
>>> I've done it on a few sites and if it is needed, a few seconds of
>>> googling will give you the solution (CSS overflow) and adding that
>>> to the site is irrelevant to whether you're coding it yourself or
>>> using a beginners tool such as DreamWeaver.
>>
>> Ignoring your "beginners tool" bait - you are absolutely right that
>> this has little or nothing to do with what tool you use. Steve's
>> rant about that
>> was
>
> ... based on the fact that I've personally seen a disproportionately
> high number of DW users who don't seem to know much about what goes on
> under the hood of a website. I think the tool is a great tool but it
> facilitates quite a bit and, that, in itself, can be a problem for
> some users.

Snit is the prototypical DW user. Clueless.

0 new messages