HTML source code
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: iPhone 4
Next: Share Wireless Internet Connection?
From: Mike Rosenberg on 9 Jun 2010 22:58 John Wolf <jwolf6589(a)THUNDERBIRDgmail.com> wrote: > How does this new article look in your PC browser or in the source? I > used KOMPOSER and Text Wrangler to edit this one. John, one definition of insanity is to repeat the same actions while expecting a different outcome. You have been told time and again that you should validate your pages at http://validator.w3.org/ and fix the problems. BTW, for anyone who thinks about bring this up, I truly do NOT expect a different outcome from John. I _do_ need to have my OCD meds adjusted, though. -- Favorite yoga position: Rosh hashavasana, the high holy pose Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
From: BreadWithSpam on 9 Jun 2010 23:36 Bill Braun <me(a)privacy.net> writes: To the folks in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, please not that John Wolf incessantly posts off-topic to the Mac newsgroups. He's one of the resident trolls. > There is no justification for treating another person in such > manner. You present yourself as a peevish bully. If a modicum of > civility is beyond your reach, be silent. Sorry, but he's more than asked for it. This far from the first time he's done this. > For the record, and while it raises an issue of another ilk, he > cross-posted to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, which is an HTML > group. Note, further, that John did NOT crosspost to c.i.w.a.h. That crosspost was added by someone responding to him. His original post was only in comp.sys.mac.system. At best, he's simply trying to drive traffic to his site, but really, his past behavior indicates that he's really mainly interested in inciting the flames in the mac newsgroups. -- Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
From: Larry Gusaas on 10 Jun 2010 00:49 On 2010/06/09 9:12 PM John Wolf wrote: > On 6/9/10 10:58 PM, Mike Rosenberg wrote: >> John Wolf<jwolf6589(a)THUNDERBIRDgmail.com> wrote: >> >>> How does this new article look in your PC browser or in the source? I >>> used KOMPOSER and Text Wrangler to edit this one. >> >> John, one definition of insanity is to repeat the same actions while >> expecting a different outcome. You have been told time and again that >> you should validate your pages at http://validator.w3.org/ and fix the >> problems. >> > > And as you have been told time and time again that the page in > question FINDS A ERROR with every single webpage posted there. Even > very popular sites like CARM got a ton of errors. And those are the errors you need to fix. The page tells you what the error is and what line of the code it is in. Now go fix it! > I dont give what that page says. I care more about human opinion. Is that because the purpose of you repeatedly posting questions and repeatedly not validating your pages and correcting the errors in them is to get people to view your religious propoganda? >> BTW, for anyone who thinks about bring this up, I truly do NOT expect a >> different outcome from John. I _do_ need to have my OCD meds adjusted, >> though. >> -- Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese
From: Stan Brown on 10 Jun 2010 08:08 On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 23:09:03 -0400, John Wolf wrote: > Mike I do it because I come here for help Were that true, you would have responded to Chris's original criticism with thanks and not with a peevish "No page is perfect!!!!" -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/ validator: http://validator.w3.org/ CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ Why We Won't Help You: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/05/05/why_we_wont_help_you
From: Bill Braun on 10 Jun 2010 08:21
Mike Rosenberg wrote: > Bill Braun <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> There is no justification for treating another person in >> such manner. > > If this were the first time John made such a post, I would absolutely > agree with you. For that matter, though, if it were the first time, > Jolly Roger would not have responded as he did, either. > > However, John has made such posts over and over to comp.sys.mac.system, > sometimes crossposted to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, sometimes > not. Each time he's done that he's been told, politely at first, > increasingly less politely with each iteration, that he needs to check > out his page at http://validator.w3.org/ and fix the problems it > indicates. > > It becomes clearer each time, at least to me, that he's doing this as a > way of making off-topic posts about his opinions on religion. > So, to put this succinctly, as I become increasingly annoyed with your behavior, I gain the right to treat you in an incivil way and demean you as a human being. Does that sum it up? So, I can do this with you, too, right? I don't need to justify my annoyance, all I need is to have a reason inside my own head, than I can speak ill of you and use foul language toward you. Is that the theory? You can blame the other person all you want for your own choices of behavior, but the only person being fooled is you. (And I don't mean that personally, Mike, only as a generalization.) Bill B |