Entertainment For Lively Minds
Stress test these arrows ->
Posted by Leedsboy on 16 October 2009 - 11:27pm.
Neg this post. I won't take it personally. I just want to see how low it can go whilst we still have them.
Ta.
- More from Leedsboy.
- Login or register to post comments
-
Aw c'mon
Don't click the up one.
in my limited experience...
... pointing out that the arrows exist has a destabilising effect.
I've reset you.
I would be disappointed if we only got to -255
Negged!
heheheheheh
and sorry Lee, I didn't 'up' or 'down' you
I got -14, once
pfft
who says the arrows limit debate and encourage puerile behaviour ?
*throws conker at james blast and runs away*
sticks and stones
"Arrows of outrageous fortune..." etc.
and a damn fine Tesco curry is now calling me, Ah'll sithee
Doh!
Sorry Lee - tried to neg you and plussed you instead. First go on arrows but that's no excuse is it
No excuse
Feel free to practise on this one - its the one on the right.
Yes!
Thanks Lee - managed to get it right this time
Glad to be of service
I'm in a negative coaching role. Call me Diego Maradona if you will.
It's late
a few glasses of wine have been taken.
So I will write this in the style of... Tony Soprano.
I've f*ckin' had it with this sh*t.
Get rid of the goddam arrows, already.
Jesus.
can we have an eye rolling button to click?
I've done a lot of that reading this blog lately.
Venus, Mars
Would that be a special woman's-eye-roll-at-men's-silliness button, miss? That expression has a particular quality all of its own.
that's the one
I'm sure all your FPO's do it too.
Usually when I come home with more LPs
But then I do the same when she turns up with yet another pair of shoes.
I have the perfect solution to this problem
I buy the records and the shoes.
are you calling me a venus?
;-)
As a bloke I find myself doing a lot of eye rolling on these threads myself.
I use them like this.
The up arrow is for when I like something but don't see the point of typing "Ooh, I liked that" as this uses valuable bandwidth which could be more usefully employed shoehorning obscure Richard Thomson-based puns into debates about hats, and the down one I indeed treat as a rolling eyes smiley as it saves encouraging more online playground debate about who's got the biggest Dad.
Pfft indeed, elhombremalo.
King of the arrers...
I made this suggestion just now on a different post
I was thinking about the arrows. What about if you set it up so we could add arrows to a post we were making. So that when a word poster wanted to have a vote on something they could attach them to the post. That would mean they wouldn't be used to just slag off someones opinions and would still be able to outreach lurkers and be used when all that would be said is yay or nay.
I dunno if that's possible in terms of web-programming but I suspect that it is. What do you think?
it's a good idea
but the problem is you would only get the difference between ups & downs, so you wouldn't know if only 1 person gave a hoot or if 1001 people had rushed to cast a vote.
I prefer using words to justify disagreeing (or agreeing).
(like this, actually)
hmmm...
maybe it should give you a number on both sides. That would allow people to vote on stuff.
To be honest I am not keen on voting, preparing debate and discussion, most interesting things can't really be simplified in that sort of a way for me anyway.
I'm just looking to integrate Fraser Lewry's desire to engage the lurkers, many peoples (and my own) objection to the negging and the webculture it encourages, and peoples desire to have votes etc... with each other.
Probably an impossible dream anyway.
oops
mistake
arrows and counter - my gripe
the arrow counters are 1 pixel in height short of the counter, that's the thing that really gets on my dick, brrrrr... a designer is never off duty
i am sure you meant to say wick
;-)
I think they are 1 picel at the bottom as well as the top. Dunno if that's better or worse aesthetically. Personally I'd have centered them.
Not quite
Padding (for that's how the boxes are sized - relative to the font, not in overall pixels) works in different ways in different browsers. In some it's right, in some it's not. It's one of several dozen HTML bugs affecting the site I can think of.
Okay Fazier (sic)
Why The Face is going on here?
now follows a screenshot: taken into PS, guides added and a new screenshot taken to explain my point
I understand your point perfectly
I'm explaining it's an HTML bug, not an oversight or an area of neglect. Your screengrab emphasises the point - three identical blocks of HTML, all controlled by precisely the same CSS classes, yet displaying in different ways.
In some versions of IE it's completely different again - the count box displays above the arrows. And that's the nature of turning what you've mocked up in Photoshop into HTML: it's a hack, a compromise necessitated by the fact that all the main browsers handle HTML differently and will output the design differently, and sometimes inconsistently. And invariably, fixing something for one browser breaks it in another.
If I could get everything to within one pixel of where it should be, across all browsers, I would be a very happy man... but chasing pixel-perfection is the swiftest route to madness.
Thankee!
and you explained it in a fashion even a graphicmonkey like me could understand