|
|
Posted by Onideus Mad Hatter on 12/14/47 11:23
On 6 Aug 2005 23:33:31 GMT, "FrankB" <you.can@request.net> wrote:
Just as a little side note to Mimic, Reaper and anyone else who
actually has a clue...keep yer distance, these kooks are MY toys, you
can have what's left AFTER I get through fucking with them.
>> No, the THIRTY FUCKIN KILOBYTES of code just magically typed
>> themselves.
>> *rolls eyes* Of COURSE it was done in Notepad, what the
>> fuck else would I have used?
>A template :)
>
>Perl, in CGI :: use HTML or some shebang ? no ?
There are no templates that could have made that site other than my
own, Stupid. Or can't your DUMBASS figure out how to look at the
contents of that .js file?
>> Hell the fact that it's covered in PNG
>With Phoootoooship ??? LOL!!
....actually I use Paint Shop Pro, you retarded moron. Yeesh, do you
even KNOW what a PNG file is?
>> Go ahead, put up a challenge, Junior,
>> I'll take on ANY contender...and I'll soundly beat the living fuck out
>> of them. `, )
>Here :
>
>1) Jacob Nielsen, an authority on Webpaeg-design-clue-foo.
>Email him a linkie to your page and post us his reply.
What are you fucking stupid? Number one, it's Jakob, not Jacob, you
drooling little moron, second of all he's a fucking moron. He has
this idea about sacrificing design for the sake of usability which is
just retarded because if your design isn't worthwhile no one will even
WANT to use your website in the first place. People LIKE animation,
people LIKE flash, people LIKE sounds, and widgets, and doo dads, and
quirky lil qausi futuristic hoo has. If you don't have those things,
people don't want to look at your sites...granted the 1% of blind
people on the planet may sing you praises, but you just sacrificed a
good 75% of your users just for those blind assholes.
>2) get your page validated W3C xHTML1.0 compliant.
I can do that easily...at the expense of Mac users or at the expense
of the horizontal and vertical center field design. W3C compliancy
doesn't gain you anything other than bragging rights, Junior. In fact
in most cases W3C compliancy will actually result in your sites being
LESS cross browser compatible. No web browser in existence currently
supports all of the W3Cs RECOMMENDATIONS...if no browser supports all
of them, why on earth would you expect websites to support all of
them?
>> You're the one who claimed to be using CMS, not me.
>The salary had all the advantages to have me get a claim to *use* it :)
In other words you're a sell out...or maybe you're just a fuckin idiot
and that's a convenient excuse. `, )
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|