Posted by Onideus Mad Hatter on 07/01/05 23:59

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:47:18 +0100, "Richard Cornford"
<Richard@litotes.demon.co.uk> wrote:

Tsch, tsch, tsch...boy you just went and stuck yer hand right into a
hornets nest, Richie...I'm afraid I'm not going to make this very
pleasant for you...I'd suggest you run away in order to try and save
face...but you won't, you're not intelligent enough to know when to
quit. `, )

>> What the fuck have you got, bitch? Oh, oh, what up:

>Articulate as ever.

You really need to see about getting that badger taken out of your
ass, it's making you such an unsociable little bitch. ^_^

>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/alt.2600/index.html
>>
>> All I have left to do is add in the content

>All? You should try taking a look at what you have done form a variety
>of remote locations:-

REEELY?! OMG NO WAY!

>http://www.litotes.demon.co.uk/bw.gif
>(144Kb: screenshot of the above URL screwing up royally)

*looks at the image*

....was it that, Windows95 that you're using? Windows98? D00d, I have
no time to deal with luddites who choose to use an OS that's nearly a
decade out of date, seriously, get the fuck outta here. *shakes head*
Yeesh, like the fuckin morons running around still using Netscape
Navigator for Hells sake.

>> (and I'll probably modify the images
>> a bit to give it a more 3D spatial feel).

>A much better short-term plan would be to take some time out to learn
>the technologies you purport to be such an expert in.

No, see, I already did that, which is why I am an expert.

>Because, lets face it, you would never have written the code that you posted at the head of
>this thread if you understood any of the technologies involved.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH...ya see Junior, this is the part where you just
start runnin at the fuckin mouth without anything to contribute. I
mean if you think my technique is flawed, well by Satan you had best
step it the fuck up and propose a better way...oh yeah, that's right
YOU CAN'T. Coincidentally, a couple people...not in alt.html nor in
alt.php have actually suggested alternate methods, like using GET
variables rather than cookies...which is peachy, I could do it that,
I'll probably try it at least, see if it's any faster. Someone
mentioned security concerns using my current methodology but they
never elaborated and the only thing I could think of is if you like
spoofed a cookie at the PHP script...although that wouldn't actually
do anything other than not make it generate an image for you...
*shrugs*

>> As far as Google is concerned that's the first EVER perfect
>> liquid website layout.

>And how did you work that out? You didn't by any chance enter the phrase
>"perfect liquid website layout" into google and conclude than none
>existed because you got no hits in return?

Actually no, I simply searched for liquid websites, liquid images and
elastic images in conjunction with phrases like web design, web
programming, HTML, PHP and JavaScript.

You see, MORON, making a perfect liquid website is something I've been
wanting to do for quite some time and generally speaking I'm not the
type to go around and do a bunch of work that someone else has already
done. So I examined quite literally hundreds of different examples of
liquid website forms and studied all current techniques to a level
that a spoon fed educated puke like you can't even fucking begin to
comprehend. And once I found no current viable method...I made my
own.

So unless you plan to post some proof to the contrary, maybe you
should just "know your role" and shut the fuck up...maybe if you're a
good little moron someone with more sense, intelligence and experience
will come along and formulate a coherent argument FOR YOU. `, )

><URL:
>http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/ppbook/extracts/coincidence.html >
>
>- and thus an amateurish approach.

And yet I fully understand every single technique I used, MORON...hell
in that one post where I answered my own question about assigning
transparency to a palette based image created via PHP I actually
described what was happening at EVERY line.

Doing things like that...sorta just blows yer lil accusation right out
of the water, don't it?

>There are a number of possible optimum implementations of this idea that
>will not go belly up at the slightest provocation (the choice depending
>on which aspects of the notion was identified as most potentially
>problematic in the context of use). The implementation as demonstrated
>(at the above URL and in the OP) is so far from being one of them that
>"perfect" should be reserved until the results of a total re-write are
>available.

You just keep runnin at the fuck mouth, Junior. Hell if it's so easy
why don't you do it? ^_^

>Incidentally, it is not a new idea.

No, but mine is the best implementation of it:
http://www.michelf.com/weblog/2005/liquid-image/

>I have seen it proposed a couple of times on Usenet (and even well implemented).

Uh huh, and the lurkers are supporting you in email too I bet. Oh
hey, if you had ACTUALLY seen it on Usenet...well where are the Google
links to prove it? Oh, oh yer just runnin at the fuckin mouth again.
Sorry, my bad.

>I have never observed it in the wild, but that is probably because on
>most web sites there is at least one person who can recognise a bad
>idea when they see one.

And yet it works perfectly, huh, fancy that...of course it took around
400 lines of original code to produce it...which I would imagine is
why most...pukes, like you haven't tried it. Satan forbid a spoon fed
educated moron like you actually puts some effort into your
interest...of course, for a puke like you, maybe it's just something
you do to try and make a living...in which case, I guess we all know
now why you're not very successful at it. Tell me something,
Richie...do you even HAVE a website? *snicker*

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net

[Back to original message]