« "Hon? Why is the site 403ing at me?" | Main | Okay, nothing better happen. »
Eric: I could be wrong....
...but I think we have a website.
Dude.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at February 16, 2006 11:55 AM
Comments
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 12:35 PM
Nah. We have a pony.
Comment from: Eric Burns posted at February 16, 2006 12:37 PM
Pony!
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 12:51 PM
Pony.
So now that this is up, I can start mainlining coffee and agonizing over the box model(*), and that pony can turn into a pretty sugar pony princess.
(*) As opposed to the safest place on the plane.
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 1:02 PM
Yes.
Comment from: Abby L. posted at February 16, 2006 1:05 PM
Hate to interrupt your alone time, but... Ummm.. INTERNET!
Comment from: TRS-80 posted at February 16, 2006 1:06 PM
Just because I can ... fift^Wsixth post! Box model, eh? Could there be a facelift in the works?
Comment from: theliel posted at February 16, 2006 1:12 PM
i like ponies...they're tasty!
now give us snarkness so I can stop reading about how abysmal the WRathulu RPG is for my daily comedy injection.
Comment from: Nate posted at February 16, 2006 1:19 PM
*taptap* Is this thing on? Hey, guys, you're live.
Comment from: LurkerWithout posted at February 16, 2006 1:30 PM
It works. I didn't have to do anything crazy to comment. Simplistic comments for those of us using IE?!?! *bliss*
Comment from: Abby L. posted at February 16, 2006 1:36 PM
Oh really? Now I can comment from work! YAYYY!! (whistles)
Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at February 16, 2006 1:49 PM
A pony? Aw, man, that's what my little sister wanted. I asked for an oviraptor action figure with firing missiles and a kung-fu grip.
Comment from: Matt Buchwald posted at February 16, 2006 1:53 PM
You bring me infinite, infinite joy whilst at work. Must fight boredom... with snark!
Comment from: Orikes posted at February 16, 2006 1:54 PM
Woo! I like ponies.
And I like being able to leave comments. That's especially spiffy.
Comment from: Archon Divinus posted at February 16, 2006 2:04 PM
You're back? That just makes my day.
Comment from: Misha Grin posted at February 16, 2006 2:19 PM
Nah, it's a PONY CAR!!!!
The only difference I've noticed is that I had to log back into TypeKey. I take it that was pretty much how you guys wanted it?
Comment from: MacGuges posted at February 16, 2006 2:20 PM
Welcome back, Websnark. (fyi, my first post)
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 2:20 PM
Hate to interrupt your alone time, but... Ummm.. INTERNET!
Eh, what do they care if we say "yes" a lot?
Comment from: TasteMyHouse posted at February 16, 2006 2:39 PM
LOL INTERNET!
*cue fast techno ala YTMND*
Comment from: miyaa posted at February 16, 2006 3:39 PM
To me, websites are more like dogs than they are ponies.
Comment from: siwangmu posted at February 16, 2006 3:41 PM
Dog and pony shows, really.
(How could I possibly NOT take that opening?)
Comment from: Dr Chuck Pearson posted at February 16, 2006 3:50 PM
You know something? I think I can even COMMENT now.
Nice pony, Eric/Weds!
Comment from: Plaid Phantom posted at February 16, 2006 3:58 PM
Pony car! Dude!
Comment from: Ford Dent posted at February 16, 2006 4:05 PM
The only thing better than having a pony is being able to comment on aforementioned pony.
Which I can do now.
Awesome.
Comment from: Dave Van Domelen posted at February 16, 2006 4:17 PM
Oh dear, someone let in the riff-raff. And the columbia.
Comment from: JoeFF85 posted at February 16, 2006 4:18 PM
Easy commenting FTW.
Holy shit I can preview and everything.
Comment from: EsotericWombat posted at February 16, 2006 4:40 PM
Maybe it's a ponywebsite?
Comment from: InkBlot posted at February 16, 2006 4:40 PM
To quote the esteemed Mr. Willis,
wiigii!!!!
Comment from: kirabug posted at February 16, 2006 5:14 PM
Welcome back! Can I pet the pony?
Comment from: Freeptop posted at February 16, 2006 5:15 PM
Cool! Glad to see you back!
So, umm... what should we do if we find things that are suddenly not working right now?
A) Be patient - it should be fixed soon.
B) Comment here.
C) Email the websnarkery folks.
D) Other.
Comment from: Thomas Blight posted at February 16, 2006 5:19 PM
Freeptop:
E) Go talk to your cat or other household animal. Eat some cheese.
And now we can commence the Hunting of the Snark, a most elusive prey.
Comment from: Kris@WLP posted at February 16, 2006 5:20 PM
Hm. Unfortunately, the new site has the old knock-twice-for-comment-window-to-work problem, at least with my browser. Ah, for the day I can switch to the new machine and Firefox...
Comment from: Dave Van Domelen posted at February 16, 2006 5:37 PM
The good news: I have DNS propagation here, woot.
The bad news: I also seem to have Kris's problem. I don't actually have to fully sign in every time, but I do have to click on the sign in link to get the comment window to open.
Comment from: Tice with a J posted at February 16, 2006 5:49 PM
In completely unrelated news: Macbeth!
Comment from: JackSlack posted at February 16, 2006 5:49 PM
However, those links on the right side of the screen could use a little CPR, I think.
Comment from: Paul Gadzikowski posted at February 16, 2006 5:50 PM
I like the cancel button.
Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at February 16, 2006 5:55 PM
Hmm... seems to work just fine in Opera. If anything, it looks like it's working better now than it had been during the last month or so on the old servers. So in five months, when I try reading Websnark on the DS, it's good to know I'll be able to do so.
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 6:28 PM
However, those links on the right side of the screen could use a little CPR, I think.
I've been working on a ground-up redesign for a couple of weeks now, addressing as many of the ongoing complaints as possible. I assure you that this is on the list.
This is harder than it looks; asking the girl with the math issues to accomodate IE's various broken implementations of the CSS box model, for starters, is a great way to make her cry. Also, there are some things you'd expect Movable Type to do out of the box which apparently it doesn't, so extensions needed to be hunted down and such.
No worries. Everything will be sorted in due time. diamiercoles@gmail.com will take your requests into consideration. Don't be unreasonable.
Comment from: Dralothien posted at February 16, 2006 7:07 PM
Hey, this is great I can post now. My happiness is unknowable. *JOY*
Comment from: larksilver posted at February 16, 2006 7:59 PM
Hey! No making the Wednesday cry! She always gets snot on the snarky pic when you do that. geeeeeeez.
Seriously, though: darn glad you've moved so successfully into the new site. The "comments won't be kept" .. er.. comments were fun and all, but I'm glad to have things as normal as they get with this bunch of lunatics around. Hey, wait, I'm one of those lunatics. cool!
Comment from: kirabug posted at February 16, 2006 8:20 PM
Dammit, DNS propogated at work but not at home! I'm seeing two timelines at once! My brain's gonna 'splode!
Comment from: Darth Paradox posted at February 16, 2006 8:55 PM
o/~ I made this half-website, half pony monster to please you... o/~
Comment from: HKR posted at February 16, 2006 9:46 PM
Posting in a legendary thread.
Oh wait, wrong site.
Comment from: Bo Lindbergh posted at February 16, 2006 10:01 PM
Actually, it's worse. I still have to view the page source to find the sign-in URL, but now there's an extra decoding step since it has "&" rather than plain "&".
(And the preview function still doesn't re-encode entities in the new text area.)
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 16, 2006 10:22 PM
Bo: What's your browsing environment?
I know preview's fucked. I have an idea but I don't know yet if it'll work.
Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at February 16, 2006 10:43 PM
This might not be a huge deal, but apparently, if I close my browser window and then reopen it, I'm automatically kicked out of TypeKey. Logging back in is no problem, of course. But considering I set my cookies to keep me logged in (and that part worked just fine before), it might be a minor bug. Not one you have to break your back over, of course. One you can worry about when all the other cards are in order.
Comment from: Robin Z posted at February 16, 2006 10:45 PM
Hey, I can comment in Firefox OSX now! Sweetness!
(Wow, is this the most pointless thread ever?)
(P.S. The preview seems to be working.)
Comment from: LurkerWithout posted at February 16, 2006 10:48 PM
I'm still signed in? Cookies were actually saved? *Amazement*
Oh and good luck with working on the site...
Comment from: Daemonic posted at February 16, 2006 10:56 PM
Who let the pony out?
Neigh Neigh Neigh Neigh!
When the snarking was nice, the snarking was jumpin' (Hey, Yippie, Yi, Yo)
And everybody havin' a ball (Hah, ho, Yippie Yi Yo)
Eric tells the fellas "start the commentin'" (Yippie Yi Yo)
And Wednesday reports to the call
The poor pony show down!
Who let the pony out?
Neigh Neigh Neigh Neigh!
(My apologies to the Baha Men)
Comment from: Bo Lindbergh posted at February 16, 2006 11:33 PM
(Firefox|Safari|MSIE) on Mac OS X.
Comment from: Kris@WLP posted at February 17, 2006 12:02 AM
To clarify my problems, here's the step-by-step I have to take to successfully post a comment.
(1) Click on "X Comments" link.
(2) Scroll to bottom- "You are not signed in. (Sign in link)." (No matter what, my sign-in does not keep from session to session, or even comment to comment. Cookies are enabled, BTW.)
(3) Sign in.
(4) Select email sharing.
(5) Comments page returns, URL ending in .html . I type a few letters into the URL blank- and NOWHERE ELSE- then hit Enter/Return. No matter what I type, no letters are visible. If I attempt to type in both blanks, the browser tab locks up.
(6) Entering something into the URL blank and hitting return brings up a -second- page, with a different look, with an URL ending in .cgi. -This- page is the one I actually enter the comment on.
(7) Hit "Post." Hitting "Preview" will show the post, but -lose- it and force me to start over.
All in all, it's enough headache that I don't post comments all that often.
Comment from: miyaa posted at February 17, 2006 12:48 AM
Daemonic: ...
Talk about beating a dead...um, pony.
Also, whatever happened to My Little Pony? I weep everytime see one of those Bratz dolls.
Comment from: DarkStar posted at February 17, 2006 1:02 AM
My Little Pony still exists... but they just don't look the same. (I have a cousin-type relation that likes them). They've got big anime eyes now, and a much more rounded look, over all. They are the like the cuteness of coloured ponies personified. Quite scary actually.
And those Bratz things are mutant freaks of nature (not the good kind) and shoud be euthanized for the protection of society.
Comment from: Freeptop posted at February 17, 2006 2:31 AM
My wife has an, er, scary amount of My Little Ponies. As she tells me, the current generation (G3), is a lot more like the original (G1) Ponies from the '80's than the G2 ponies from the 90's...
Apparently, a whole bunch of pictures for new Ponies just came out from the recent Toyfair in New York. So, yeah - they're still around.
And I just realized I know entirely too much about My Little Ponies at this point.
Comment from: gwalla posted at February 17, 2006 2:47 AM
HKR: gb2/b/
Comment from: Podima posted at February 17, 2006 5:36 AM
Good God, give them easy commenting and Websnark turns into a 4chan clone.
What's next, comical images of Adolf Hitler?
Comment from: Kairamek posted at February 17, 2006 6:38 AM
Of course My Little Ponies are still around! If it was popular in the '80s it's been revamped, rehashed, and repackaged at todays market values. I felt a searing pain where my childhood inocense once lay the day I saw a $10 Ninja Turtle that was exactly the same as it was 18 years ago, only I bought it for $3.
Comment from: Kairamek posted at February 17, 2006 6:40 AM
It... it worked... it finally worked! I can POST! I've been trying, and failing, to do this since October 2004! BWAHAHAHAHA!!
Er... sorry about the double post, I'm just overjoyed.
Comment from: Matt Buchwald posted at February 17, 2006 7:37 AM
You know what I don't get? Yesterday, when the new site became active, the DNS here at work pointed to the new website. Today, it points to the old website.
Make up your mind, internet gremlins!
Comment from: Denyer posted at February 17, 2006 7:39 AM
asking the girl with the math issues to accomodate IE's various broken implementations of the CSS box model, for starters, is a great way to make her cry.
It gets easier if you ignore the padding attribute for the most part and just use more container elements. You've already got the DOCTYPE, though, so as long as nothing throws a browser into quirks rendering...
Lists, on the other hand... eugh. Friggin' impossible to get consistent rendering across all of the majors.
Comment from: donnerfaust posted at February 17, 2006 8:51 AM
*tink tink tink*
Do I get to play now?
Comment from: donnerfaust posted at February 17, 2006 8:52 AM
Woo! Posting! Woo!
Comment from: cencithomas posted at February 17, 2006 9:17 AM
LOL INTERNET! *cue fast techno ala YTMND**puts a random number of coins of varying currencies and denominations in the Pretty Pony Jukebox*
*fires up Eric Prydz Call On Me*
*volume up to 11...aaand back to the bar for another McEwan's*
Comment from: Inu Rashii posted at February 17, 2006 11:26 AM
I'm ... I'm here at last! I've wanted to do this forever!
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 17, 2006 11:28 AM
Kris: OOC, if you turn email sharing on by default in Typekey, rather than per-session, do you still get the same issues? It's a completely random thing that shouldn't make a difference, but ... well, random things and all that. (However, I have a horrible feeling that this is not a resolvable issue.)
Denyer:
It gets easier if you ignore the padding attribute for the most part and just use more container elements.
Eeeee. Point. That has the taint of excess non-semanticism about it, though. (I've resigned myself to a wrapperdiv, but I feel kinda dirty doing it. I already feel really eegy using a transitional doctype.)
Comment from: LNick posted at February 17, 2006 12:07 PM
Sweet Post of Grandma's Ghost! I can post!
Comment from: Jason posted at February 17, 2006 1:23 PM
Weds: Try downloading the "IE7" set of scripts. They actually make IE do what it's supposed to a fair portion of the time. It's at dean.edwards.name/IE7 and from what I've used of it, it works pretty well in conjunction with the 4.01 Strict DOCTYPE.
Comment from: siwangmu posted at February 17, 2006 3:32 PM
Weds, why are you talking to Kris out of character?
Comment from: aaronbourque posted at February 17, 2006 4:11 PM
This is not a website. It is a picture of a website.
Comment from: AJLindburgh posted at February 17, 2006 4:17 PM
Wow, so something got fixed because since day one of signing up I couldn't post anything via Type Key to this website.
Of course, the point I wanted to make when I signed up is of no relevance anymore. :/
Comment from: aaronbourque posted at February 17, 2006 4:18 PM
Mr. siwangmu, Kris is Mr. Burns' role-playing identity. Now, you must die.
Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque
Comment from: Eric Burns posted at February 17, 2006 5:10 PM
Mr. siwangmu, Kris is Mr. Burns' role-playing identity. Now, you must die.
The thing is? My sister is named Kris. (And is not Kris@WLP, for the record.)
So now I have this creepy sense like I'm supposed to be role playing my own sister.
That is not cool, Aaron!
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 17, 2006 5:14 PM
Jason: I'd really rather keep the browser buggy -- I need to test for failure modes in the general population. (Which is the only way I'll touch IE these days, to be honest -- not that that's hard when you're a Camino-using Mac weenie.)
Comment from: Paul Gadzikowski posted at February 17, 2006 5:14 PM
This is not a website. It is a picture of a website.
It's the shadow of a puppet of a website.
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 17, 2006 5:17 PM
Weds, why are you talking to Kris out of character?
Because it's *hard* for a pretty sugar pony princess to understand bad bad browser buggies.
(Curiosity, not character. Damned multi-use acronyms!)
Comment from: Copper Hamster posted at February 17, 2006 6:50 PM
This is harder than it looks; asking the girl with the math issues to accomodate IE's various broken implementations of the CSS box model, for starters, is a great way to make her cry. Also, there are some things you'd expect Movable Type to do out of the box which apparently it doesn't, so extensions needed to be hunted down and such.I feel the pain. Just think, in a year or so IE7 will come out, and then we can deal with all it's bizzaro world rendering methods on top of 5.5, 6, Netscape 4.5 (I have a fair number of page hits.. 15%? .. That still use a 4.x netscape) etc ad nauseum.
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 17, 2006 9:12 PM
IE7 looks like it will be mostly sane. Recent WaSP articles on the subject suggest that the worst fooferah will center around legacy CSS hacks, and we knew those were never futureproof. (Conditional comments bring their own issues, but they're cleaner ones.)
Our Netscape 4.x userbase is sufficiently tiny, and semi-mature contemporary standards support widespread enough in other minority browsing environments by comparison, that I can't justify providing much more than basic chrome for those users. There comes a point where accomodating as many people as possible can take the form of "not very shiny, thanks."
Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at February 18, 2006 12:44 AM
"It's the shadow of a puppet of a website."
Wait, so we're now dealing with Plato's Allegory of the Website in the Cave?
Comment from: Jason posted at February 18, 2006 9:35 AM
Weds: Fake-IE7 isn't something you put on your machine; it's a conditional comment that you add to the page(s) to reference a set of scripts that you've copied to the site. That way everyone who uses IE/Win to view your site gets to see the good version. Or maybe just all the ones who use JavaScript, but that's a huge percentage anyway.
Real-IE7 is a whole 'nother nightmare just waiting to happen. They're fixing a lot of stuff, but it looks like they're also fixing some of the syntax bugs that we use to get around the rendering bugs, then not fixing (all of) the rendering bugs. That should be... interesting.
Copper: If you don't mind my asking, what kind of site do you run, and what kind of HTTP log analyzer? 15% sounds way-high for anything other than a corporate intranet nowadays; you may just be getting misreporting of things like search engine spiders and e-mail harvesters.
Comment from: Kris@WLP posted at February 18, 2006 11:06 AM
Wed: Since the "share email" option is no longer coming up, the point is moot.
All else: I'm not Eric. We are separated by roughly two thousand miles of distance and a significant amount of weight. - Oh, and Eric isn't bald.
(And if you thought I was Eric, did you think Eric was behind WLP? The thought hurts it my head...)
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 18, 2006 4:16 PM
Jason: Ah! Right, okay. I'm pretty sure I've seen at least one project accomplishing the same end from client side, and it made me run screaming like a little girl; sorry for misidentifying.
I can't say as I feel comfortable relying on Javascript to make sure IE users are getting the right thing; I'd rather just include as comprehensive a battery of conditional comments as possible from the outset and have done with it.
With real IE7 a fair ways off, I'm not going to panic about which bugs haven't been fixed yet (and I'm *delighted* that the syntax errors are being fixed, to be honest). I'm a bit worried, but the best thing I can do is build things as sensibly and easily-deconstructed as I can now.
Comment from: Wednesday White posted at February 18, 2006 7:46 PM
Wed: Since the "share email" option is no longer coming up, the point is moot.
I'm afraid it's not, Kris. We forgot to turn that back on, and this just reminded us. :(
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)