Comments on: Going Paleo: Week 4 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/ se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:52:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: locke http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140558 locke Tue, 19 Jun 2007 01:21:11 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140558 My suggestion (advice I should probably heed myself) would be to type your post in a text editor then copy and paste it into the submission box. Make sure you use a text editor though, and not a word processor. A word processor may use crazy character encodings and cause your post to look like <a href="http://anthropik.com/2005/04/on-optimism/#comment-496" rel="nofollow">this</a>. My suggestion (advice I should probably heed myself) would be to type your post in a text editor then copy and paste it into the submission box.

Make sure you use a text editor though, and not a word processor. A word processor may use crazy character encodings and cause your post to look like this.

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140523 Jason Godesky Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:48:36 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140523 Admittedly, the comments have required a fairly high level of computer literacy. I'll add the preview to the specs for the redesign we're working on—and a bigger typing window, while I'm at it. Does a WYSIWYG go too far? Yeah, if only because no WYSIWYG ever produces good markup. But perhaps some buttons to create tags.... Personally, I don't use any kind of preview for proofreading, even for blog entries. I just read what I've typed, tags and all. But then, I'm a programmer. I've actually had dreams in computer code, so I may not be the best person to ask.... Admittedly, the comments have required a fairly high level of computer literacy. I’ll add the preview to the specs for the redesign we’re working on—and a bigger typing window, while I’m at it. Does a WYSIWYG go too far? Yeah, if only because no WYSIWYG ever produces good markup. But perhaps some buttons to create tags….

Personally, I don’t use any kind of preview for proofreading, even for blog entries. I just read what I’ve typed, tags and all. But then, I’m a programmer. I’ve actually had dreams in computer code, so I may not be the best person to ask….

]]> By: Jase from Oz http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140515 Jase from Oz Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:32:31 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140515 Also, how do you bloggers preview/proof-read your writing before posting, when it includes xhtml? - I mean what tool can I use for this? Anthropik doesn't enable the Word-Press preview button, which Savage-minds has enabled. So, odd as it sounds, i have been known to use the Savage-minds > post a comment window > preview button, to preview what would be my Anthropik post before posting here. I'm guessing you regular-posters and blog-owners have a better way to do this, and on the down-side you probably take these methods, in writing blogs, for granted. Perhaps somewhere on the wordpress website there's generic post-preview functionality – I thought I found this there once before but have know lost the page. Please advise me on the best method for previewing/proof-reading, as I’m someone who doesn't have my own blog (eg. wordpress setup) to use for previewing. Also, how do you bloggers preview/proof-read your writing before posting, when it includes xhtml? - I mean what tool can I use for this?
Anthropik doesn’t enable the Word-Press preview button, which Savage-minds has enabled. So, odd as it sounds, i have been known to use the Savage-minds > post a comment window > preview button, to preview what would be my Anthropik post before posting here.
I’m guessing you regular-posters and blog-owners have a better way to do this, and on the down-side you probably take these methods, in writing blogs, for granted.
Perhaps somewhere on the wordpress website there’s generic post-preview functionality – I thought I found this there once before but have know lost the page.

Please advise me on the best method for previewing/proof-reading, as I’m someone who doesn’t have my own blog (eg. wordpress setup) to use for previewing.

]]> By: Giulianna Lamanna http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140116 Giulianna Lamanna Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:35:35 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-140116 The word "snark" is relatively new, I think... if it existed before the rise of the internet, it at least wasn't very popular. Anyway, I've read that it's a combination of "snide" and "remark." Snarking on someone/being snarky means being sarcastic, usually in a really mean way. An example of using strikethroughs in a snarky way would be something like: "The film <em>Without a Paddle</em> was greatly enjoyed by <strike>stoners and Seth Green's mom</strike> a wide variety of people." The joke being that the writer almost said something really nasty, then decided not to. I don't see why you'd want to call attention to your typos. If you know they're there, why not just fix them? This isn't pencil-on-paper. Just delete whatever mistakes you made and type the word again more carefully. That takes far less energy than turning all your typos red and crossing them out. The word “snark” is relatively new, I think… if it existed before the rise of the internet, it at least wasn’t very popular. Anyway, I’ve read that it’s a combination of “snide” and “remark.” Snarking on someone/being snarky means being sarcastic, usually in a really mean way.

An example of using strikethroughs in a snarky way would be something like: “The film Without a Paddle was greatly enjoyed by stoners and Seth Green’s mom a wide variety of people.” The joke being that the writer almost said something really nasty, then decided not to.

I don’t see why you’d want to call attention to your typos. If you know they’re there, why not just fix them? This isn’t pencil-on-paper. Just delete whatever mistakes you made and type the word again more carefully. That takes far less energy than turning all your typos red and crossing them out.

]]> By: Jase from Oz http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139916 Jase from Oz Mon, 18 Jun 2007 07:06:32 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139916 What's snarking? What’s snarking?

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139834 Jason Godesky Mon, 18 Jun 2007 04:43:20 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139834 Strikethroughs really shouldn't be used for typos. Quoting is quoting, and you should correct any typos in your own comments before posting. Typos aren't a very big problem, though, so there's really no need to highlight them that much. The proper role of the strikethrough is ... well, frankly, I don't know. <strike>I guess it's mostly for snarking, but that would make it offensive in nature.</strike> Strikethroughs really shouldn’t be used for typos. Quoting is quoting, and you should correct any typos in your own comments before posting. Typos aren’t a very big problem, though, so there’s really no need to highlight them that much.

The proper role of the strikethrough is … well, frankly, I don’t know. I guess it’s mostly for snarking, but that would make it offensive in nature.

]]> By: Jase from Oz http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139816 Jase from Oz Mon, 18 Jun 2007 04:14:33 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139816 Fair-enough, thanks. Strikethrough is what I'll use then, for correcting, and at the same emphasising, the terrible-typos. Fair-enough, thanks. Strikethrough is what I’ll use then, for correcting, and at the same emphasising, the terrible-typos.

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139811 Jason Godesky Mon, 18 Jun 2007 04:08:30 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139811 I believe the strikethrough tag works for the strike, but that should be used <em>sparingly</em>. <strike>Example.</strike> Differently colored text is never acceptable. It's distracting, difficult to read, and generally inconsiderate of your readers. I believe the strikethrough tag works for the strike, but that should be used sparingly. Example. Differently colored text is never acceptable. It’s distracting, difficult to read, and generally inconsiderate of your readers.

]]> By: Jase from Oz http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139796 Jase from Oz Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:56:23 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139796 So then...? A red font <b>or</b>strikethrough font then - how, acceptably? So then…? A red font orstrikethrough font then - how, acceptably?

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139791 Jason Godesky Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:52:10 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/04/going-paleo-week-4/#comment-139791 A red font with a strikethrough would be pretty unacceptable just on basic principle. A red font with a strikethrough would be pretty unacceptable just on basic principle.

]]>