fpgroups.com: A raw chat room is now available

[Fairlight]

On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 06:07:53AM -0700, fp at casabellagallery.com may or
may not have proven themselves an utter git by pronouncing:
>
> > "Do you want polite, or do you want sincere?"  --Unknown
>
> Sincere is good, I do not have a problem with being sincere.

Good, since I have a hard time being polite while being sincere--at least
from the recipient's point of view.  It's not like I set out to be rude.
People just don't handle very well the fact that I don't sugarcoat things.

> When you enter a "free" and "public" area, you loose the right of
> expectation of privacy.  

I think you lose -some- expectation of it.  I would disagree to the point
that there are public services out there where anonymity can be expected,
places offer free, public services and yet have privacy policies where you
can see exactly what they'll do with your personal data, etc.

> While I agree with some of your points, making sure people do not see
> what you say, how you say it and providing you exclusive messaging really
> does not fall into my "MUST HAVE" list.  It might be nice, but not a must
> have!

I'll just agree to disagree.  You're certainly not going to change my mind.
You may change yours after you or your users need the functionality that
isn't there too many times.  Or you may not.  

> > Like the $1.7 YouTube, whose comment reply system has been hosed for
> > over a week now?  Who can't even afford a simple status indicator when
> > doing AJAX calls for ratings or comment submission?  Yeah, I know about
> > some of these places.  What is -really- ironic are the number of places
> > selling web design and programming services whose own sites generate
> > errors. :)
>
> Ouch, give the referee a pair of glasses, he sure should had seen that
> low-blow!

Let's just say YouTube isn't coded worth a damn, IMNSHO.  At least not
on the front side.  Based on results I've had, I'd say the back side is
questionable as well, as the place can't even transcode to FLV without
desyncing the audio, when I have 3 software packages (ranging from $49 to
$399) that do it flawlessly.  Note that I haven't spent $1.7bn to be able
to do this competently.  Common complaint for music performance videos
especially, but also animation, etc.  YT is very good at making you look
far less professional and conscientious about production than you really
are.  The competing sites are technologically superior, but don't have the
audience size.  Yet.  YT keeps dicking around, things may change.

> > That's where places like Serif and CoffeeCup excel--they nail details
> > the giants like Adobe totally let slide to the side.
>
> You keep on leaving filePro out of your applications list ...

You said I probably didn't like any software I didn't write myself.  I was
correcting that notiong.  Where fP enters into "software I like" is...well
it doesn't.  It's software I've come to terms with.  I can certainly use
it, I understand much of it (reports being my weak point for lack of use),
and I'm pretty competent in it, although it's certainly not my environment
of choice.  Nowhere in there does "like" figure into things.

> The JS script was written by a friend.  I mentioned this to Orlando last
> night in the chat room.  I have nothing to hide.  The fact that you were
> able to download the file in question proves that.  I asked him for a

You'd have to be able to for it to be used--it's JS.  Anyone with Firebug
or similar installed can look at it.

> little help and I asked him to not "spoon feed" me the entire solution,
> just to get me in the right direction ... and so he did ... In fact, he
> also helped me with PHP since I normally do not use some of the things he
> suggested I use.  Had you given me a hand and put your name within the
> sessions of code where you helped, I would have not removed it.
>
> Again, if this was something alarming to me, I could have easily removed
> his initials and place my own - Doing that, would have been totally out
> of character with me.

I do believe you're missing the points.  Forest for the trees and all that.

1) You claimed to not want to use any other solution because you want to
write the code, control the code, etc., etc.  Yet you didn't actually write
this code, from the look of it.  It's not a matter of being caught out for
not writing your own code, it's a matter of using an argument that you're
largely invalidating by action.  I don't give a damn who wrote what--until
they say something is preferable because they write it and it's clear they
didn't.  At that point, the stated rationale for avoiding other packages
just falls on its face.

2) The only reason I brought up the fact that I saw the code at all was to
say, "Hey, you know I've -looked- at the source, and this is definitely
broken if used 'x' way".  In short, as I tried to illustrate, if people
submit a second (or more) message before the first has finished, all but
the last one submitted will be lost.

Out of curiosity, are you putting in a discussion forum?  It's actually a
bigger need than realtime chat.  I might not be on the same schedule as you
(I can guarantee I'm currently not), but we could, say, not clutter this
list with back and forth about your site if we had forums to use.

mark->
-- 
The latest synth mixdown...
http://media.fairlite.com/Isolation_Voiceless_Cry_Mix.mp3