 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
Nah, he's valuable. :)
I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do
with the extra leap second?
~Steve~
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.495c90c772c9212c30acaf600@news.povray.org...
> .... and the Forum provider, too...
Yeah, that's the thing with free forums, you have no control.
Apparently, it's only the .co.uk domain that's down, and they just say
basically: "Hope it's back soon, sorry for the inconvenience." :o/
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
news:tp6pl4laaka2h1hv3jfcpqba99f76f39jf@4ax.com...
> I bet Steve's having kittens :)
LOL! :)
"DON'T PANIC CAP'N MAINWARING!!"
~Steve~
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:36:38 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dot com> wrote:
>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
>news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>
> Nah, he's valuable. :)
>
> I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do
>with the extra leap second?
>
The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)
And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
20-20-20 was added to both entries.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
news:of8pl4defnvgj7c0m9t55rvrc0cdtak0l8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:36:38 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
>>news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>>
>> Nah, he's valuable. :)
>>
>> I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do
>>with the extra leap second?
>>
>
> The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)
Could be! :) No, I'm not sure about that extra second because I guess
our computers also took the extra second into account? If so, then surely
the web code would still work as intended?
>
> And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
> 20-20-20 was added to both entries.
No, don't forget that the same rule applies to both challenges where you
have to rate all other entries, and you both did.
~Steve~
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:16:48 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>> The well known *Year 2009* bug, I assume :)
>
> Could be! :) No, I'm not sure about that extra second because I guess
>our computers also took the extra second into account?
I doubt it unless your computer is set up to download the correct time from an
online site. (Computers are the most expensive, inaccurate clocks that I know
of.)
>If so, then surely
>the web code would still work as intended?
>
I was joking :)
>>
>> And there was a slight "male-chicken up" in the animations, too. An extra
>> 20-20-20 was added to both entries.
>
> No, don't forget that the same rule applies to both challenges where you
>have to rate all other entries, and you both did.
I think that there is a little bit of logic missing from Colin's code.
If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO.
I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.
BTW Thanks for sending the reminder to vote for the animations, out.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.495c90c772c9212c30acaf600@news.povray.org...
> .... and the Forum provider, too...
Ok, the forum is up again now.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:495c9da7$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
> news:k73pl4l6rrmd508l7f1pub1mj6hmnvdqiq@4ax.com...
>> Sack Colin (the web developer) ;)
>
> Nah, he's valuable. :)
>
> I'm not sure what's happened, but I wonder if it's anything to do
> with the extra leap second?
Ok, it was nothing to do with that leap second, it was the test image
that Colin uploaded on Clipka's account to check that the upload was working
for him. He's fixed it so that it can't happen again. :)
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
> then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO.
> I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.
Wouldn't be to fair, because then you can boost your competition standing by
simply not voting. Say for simplicity's sake that every vote would be 10-10-10,
and we had three contestants A, B and C. Both B and C vote, A doesn't (or his
vote is incomplete and therefore discounted). Makes:
A: 30 + 30 = 60 (from B and C)
B: 30 = 30 (from C)
C: 30 = 30 (from B)
Fair? Not really, I think (at least as long as the ranking is according to total
points instead of points per vote). So to discourage *not* voting, *voters* get
the advantage. Everyone can get it, by becoming active himself, instead of
relying on others to get active.
(OTOH, placing all "1-1-1" votes has quite a similar effect as not voting at
all...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 23:23:11 EST, "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>> If individual voter does not vote for all entries {except their own (if any)}
>> then discount their votes. Should be the only rule here IM(Not So)HO.
>> I don't see the need for adding the 20-20-20 now every member can vote.
>
>Wouldn't be to fair, because then you can boost your competition standing by
>simply not voting.
True, I was thinking more along the lines of I would like to see the actual
highest score. Now that I think of it I would like to see all of the scores with
comments, if any. I also don't think that it needs to be a secret vote, either.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
