Jump to content

Read This, Too: Advice From & For Your Humble Mod


  • Please log in to reply

239 replies to this topic

#1

1formybaby

1formybaby

    Video Archivist

Posted Jan 2, 2004 @ 12:51 AM

Strega, have you written any individual character analyses? I would love to see them if you have, or I would love to see that, if you haven't. No pressure, honest.

Also, generally, I've explored the advice given to me about creating boxes for quotes, it doesn't seem to work for me. Is there a 1-2-3 way for me to do quote boxes? Sorry, I'm new to the internet - and very cute, intelligent in other ways, etc...

Thanks to anyone who responds, a kiss or a handshake, for the New Year. Many blessings. And many boxes for me to be able to do in future.

Oops, bwah, now I'll never get help
  • 0

#2

Naxus

Naxus

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 2, 2004 @ 4:52 AM

As far as quotes go, the easiest way to do it is to use the easy-formatting buttons provided in the 'Add Reply' screen.

So to do it that way, put whatever you want to quote into your message; then highlight the entire quote and hit the button above the entry form that says 'Quote.' This should take care of it, although occasionally there are problems. I don't know if all computers work this way, but if you have to scroll to get to the button, you might want to use that scroll button on the mouse, if you have it (when I use the scroll bar it un-highlights the quote).

Er, anyway, the basic code for a quote is like this:

[quote]whatever the text is[/quote]

I don't think it matters whether it's all lowercase or all caps, but make sure that the 'slash' (/) is in the last part, not the first. I've been seeing that mistake a few times lately. You can also (again may only be on some computers) hit alt+q, then put in the text, then hit alt+q again. Anyway, hope all that helps. Whenever you have a formatting question, just check out the TWoP Site FAQ and it should show you what you need to do.

Edited by Naxus, Jan 2, 2004 @ 4:55 AM.

  • 0

#3

JHeaton

JHeaton

    Stalker

Posted Jan 2, 2004 @ 10:13 AM

You might also consider spending some time in the Test Zone experimenting the the various formatting options until you feel comfortable with them.
  • 0

#4

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 3, 2004 @ 12:06 AM

Thanks, folks.

1formybaby -- No, I'm not really into the characters separate from the plot, and I don't think I could write more than a paragraph about any of them in isolation.
  • 0

#5

Leena

Leena

    Video Archivist

Posted Jan 3, 2004 @ 1:26 AM

No, I'm not really into the characters separate from the plot, and I don't think I could write more than a paragraph about any of them in isolation.


"Wesley sucks."

Now that's not even really a whole paragraph ;)
  • 0

#6

Ailiana

Ailiana

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 3, 2004 @ 2:56 PM

There's a new topic started in Angel & Son that indicates it's a spoiler topic. I was under the impression that there would be only one spoiler topic, not that spoilers would be segregated by whom they are about. I'm a spoiler phobe, so I wasn't willing to check it out, but I also wasn't sure it was right. And, while I know that you have a very specific spoiler policy that probably isn't violated by the name of the thread, I may have learned something I didn't want to know from just the title. Thanks Strega.
  • 0

#7

Vandalisimo

Vandalisimo

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 3, 2004 @ 3:02 PM

I'm sure the thread will be shut down since there already is both a spoiler topic and a Connor topic. Don't worry Ailiana, you didn't learn anything from the title. Actually, even reading the post doesn't tell you anything spoilery. It's speculation at best.

Edited by Vandalisimo, Jan 3, 2004 @ 3:03 PM.

  • 0

#8

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 3, 2004 @ 10:52 PM

It's closed. And as noted, it wasn't actually about spoilers. Thanks.
  • 0

#9

CleaPet

CleaPet

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 10, 2004 @ 5:15 PM

Strega, I'm starting to suspect I'm more of a spoilerphobe than I thought, but the WB descriptions of upcoming episodes posted in the Season 5 topic...how are those not spoilers? I can understand tvguide summaries because they are so vague, but the WB summaries give very specific plot points. I was going to post a response something to the effect of please emphasize a specific plot point so you can talk freely about the summaries in the spoiler topic, but the whole thing is plot points.

*confused*

If they are not spoilers, then can we move them to the Speculation topic and I will know from now on to tread carefully in that thread?

Thanks.
  • 0

#10

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 10, 2004 @ 6:10 PM

They're not spoilers because it's too hard to treat things the network releases as spoilers, since they're the basis of those blurbs everywhere, and what they mention usually end up in ads & promos.

I did a redirect & modified the topic names, though. I think the best way to handle it is kinda as you said: the speculation topic is about the future, and the S5 topic should be about the season so far -- what's already happened. Which is a slight change, since the S5 topic existed before any episodes had aired, but it might be a little less confusing this way for people who aren't sure which topic to post in. Maybe. We'll give it a try.
  • 0

#11

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 12, 2004 @ 11:49 PM

I'm assuming the S5/speculation distinction makes sense or someone would have said otherwise, but seriously, if it's confusing or a problem for anyone, speak up. I'm making this up as I go.

I also wanted to make sure y'all knew about the upcoming shirts. Which I nagged Glark to make after he made an ill-considered promise ages ago. Save your pennies, make this a best-seller, and watch me get drunk with power!

Which'll make a change from the vodka.
  • 0

#12

Kalbear

Kalbear

    Stalker

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 4:53 AM

Oh.My.God. That's awesome. You're responsible for this? I so am claiming dibs on the title of "First priest of worshipping at Strega's feet.

Seriously, that rocks. There's about two other people I know that will get it, but it's cool enough that it doesn't matter.
  • 0

#13

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 9:50 AM

It was Glark's idea. I just reminded him. And whined. And stuff.
  • 0

#14

Wolfe

Wolfe

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 11:21 AM

I'll take 2. One for me and one for my beloved. He actually hates Spike and I just want Spike to shut up. So we both win. Yay, Strega & Glark!
  • 0

#15

EONdc

EONdc

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 11:41 AM

Did it originally start off as a "Shut Up, Wesley" t-shirt?

Those are awesome. I can't wait.
  • 0

#16

NightMare

NightMare

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 5:45 PM

Almost makes it worth it that they added Spike to the cast. Okay, it doesn't, but it does dull the pain a bit. Thanks, Strega
  • 0

#17

FourGOM

FourGOM

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 13, 2004 @ 6:53 PM

Oh. My. God. If ever my Strega love was in doubt (and it never was) now it is cemented for eternity.
  • 0

#18

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 1:11 AM

(Oh, hi. Thanks! But seriously: it's Glark's idea, from a while back.)

And now, a heartfelt plea about a trivial issue:
If you're replying to a particular poster, answering their question or commenting on something they said, please start off by identifying who you're talking to. I haven't always done that, so I understand that it doesn't seem necessary at times, but I've been trying to train myself to always start replies with "[poster name]--" because I've confused other people (and myself) when I don't. I've been seeing more and more posts where it's clear that you're replying to/commenting on/answering an earlier post, but there's no indication which post, and where. (Some people do always give names, and bless you for it.)

And even if you quote part of the post, say who the author is. It's a lot easier to scan through for a name than to reread a couple of pages looking for one sentence. And honestly, if you name the author, you may not need to quote at all. It depends -- in the episode topic, I think that quotes help during the initial post-episode flurry. I certainly don't remember who said what when I'm reading five pages in row. But in quieter topics (or times) you don't need to quote if we can just scroll up to see the original post above yours.

These aren't awful things that anyone's going to get in trouble over, but I think bearing them in mind would make it a lot easier to follow the conversation. It definitely would help me, and I'm going to presume it might help other people. ...And that's one to grow on!
  • 0

#19

FriscoChick

FriscoChick

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 25, 2004 @ 9:47 PM

Strega, I'm interested in continuing the conspiracy theory discussion regarding Lindsey, Eve, and the cyber-ninjas from "Lineage" in an appropriate place, and apologize for my contribution towards the tangent in the episode topic. However, I'm not quite sure which topic would be the best place to talk about them. I'd be pretty hesitant to propose a topic just for the cyber-ninjas given my belief that ME could very well drop them entirely, but a little part of me believes they will address the loose end. Would the Lindsey topic be the best place? Or the Eve topic? Do we need a "Lindsey and Eve: what are those crazy kids up to?"-type topic, or is that too redundant given that both characters have their own topics? Is it simply speculation?

Your guidance is appreciated.

Edited by FriscoChick, Jan 25, 2004 @ 9:49 PM.

  • 0

#20

FriscoChick

FriscoChick

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 25, 2004 @ 9:48 PM

DDP. Sorry.

Edited by FriscoChick, Jan 25, 2004 @ 9:49 PM.

  • 0

#21

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 26, 2004 @ 1:47 AM

The speculation topic seems appropriate.
  • 0

#22

jerry

jerry

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 27, 2004 @ 1:17 PM

Thank you, Strega. Google was very helpful.

Can I run this by you? fanwank = references to past stories or elements for no other purpose than to please the fans... also, elements used so often they've become cliched.

Isn't that continuity porn?
  • 0

#23

SNeaker

SNeaker

    Stalker

Posted Jan 27, 2004 @ 1:47 PM

I could be wrong, but I think a "fanwank" is an explanation made up by fans to explain away a possible plot hole.
  • 0

#24

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 27, 2004 @ 3:08 PM

Yup. Continuity porn is gratuitous continuity (it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it) and a fanwank is an explanation for something that, at least ideally, isn't contradicted by the show, but isn't really supported by the show either. "Maybe Harmony commutes to work via the sewers" is a fanwank.
  • 0

#25

jerry

jerry

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 27, 2004 @ 4:08 PM

"fanwank" is an explanation made up by fans to explain away a possible plot hole

That's what I thought, so I was surprised when I googled "fanwank" and got the definition I gave in my first post. Thanks for the clarification.
  • 0

#26

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 12:48 AM

Yeah, I think the term has different connotations in different groups, but on TWoP I've only seen it used to mean explanations invented by fans so I'm stickin' with that.
  • 0

#27

CleaPet

CleaPet

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 11:47 AM

Season 5 Wish List. lboogy's post = spoiler. I think.

I feel spoiled, anyway. Big time. Warn the others!

Edited by CleaPet, Jan 28, 2004 @ 11:49 AM.

  • 0

#28

Lila

Lila

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 12:19 PM

It wasn't exactly a spoiler since it wasn't clear what it was referring to. But it did seem like "I know a spoiler" taunting, and it's been edited because that's pretty rude.
  • 0

#29

Null

Null

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 30, 2004 @ 2:08 AM

I hope this is a fitting place to ask. What did "DDP" (FriscoChick, 9:48 pm) mean?

Edited by Myth, Jan 30, 2004 @ 2:13 AM.

  • 0

#30

TrudiRose

TrudiRose

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 30, 2004 @ 7:32 AM

I think it means "Darn double post!" It's when you hit "post," and it looks like it didn't go through, so you post again, only to find that you've accidentally posted twice and have to delete one of them.
  • 0