On 2/27/06, Al Sparber wrote:
I don't think you need to go back to 10th grade, but - for your own
sake - you might want to read Genesis 4:9 :-)
Al,
Read, duly noted, and point taken.
Also pertinent, is the quote I received with my Word a Day email today:
It came to me that reform should
Ben Buchanan wrote:
Hi,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on their site, are now
over.
[snip]
I'm astonished at the tone - although not
Lea de Groot wrote:
Maybe (s)he knew all those things were a problem
I doubt it. If that were the case, I'm sure the response would have
been more along the lines of: Thank you, we are aware of these problems
and we are investigating ways to fix them, but at this stage there is
nothing we
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
What kind of person would rather insult the customer instead of
admitting they have a problem?
A bank ?
I managed to get the standard filler text for a bank's customer
service department in pointing out some issues on Firefox 1.5. The
problem still isn't fixed either..
SunUp wrote:
/me considers changing her name to sundown
You'll need a satin dress and a very private room, and watch yourself
around the back stairs ;-)
mark
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
who was this whole msg about, sunny? or what, or he started it about some1 else
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
On 27/02/2006, at 7:23 PM, adam LEAPER wrote:
who was this whole msg about, sunny? or what, or he started it
about some1 else
Thats ok - I don't think we need to name names.
mutters some legal mumbo jumbo
Going once, going twice...
If no one has anything good to add, I think we can close
Time to name names.
I would like to avoid the ISP you talk about. Wich company is it?
:)
Giles
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the
On 2/27/06, Ben wrote:
I'm astonished at the tone - although not especially surprised by the
content - of their reply. Even if they thought you were being the
biggest pain in history, they should remain polite when replying.
I should confess that, by the time I got the comments that I shared
Ah, I remember working as an ASP/SQL developer for a local company that
was the leader in site construction. At the time, I was just
discovering CSS layout techniques, and felt obligated to try and change
the whole company over to the newer better way of building sites.
I worked with a
On 27/02/2006, at 7:39 PM, Absalom Media wrote:
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
What kind of person would rather insult the customer instead of
admitting they have a problem?
A bank ?
I managed to get the standard filler text for a bank's customer
service department in pointing out some issues on
Hi folks,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on their site, are now
over.
I dropped a line to my ISP (ostensibly to enquire about my account)
and
On 27/02/2006, at 1:16 PM, SunUp wrote:
I will now be a good little backyard hobbyist web-designer as they
called me (actually, it's my day job too), and never mention standards
again.
completely gobstopped
These guys are professional service providers?
If the tone of the message was as bad
SunUp wrote:
When I could not find what I was looking for I was told: I recommend
that this issue in this case has not been a usability issue but
instead has been a logic issue on the clients side, and I would
recommend that you re-attend year 10-12 english classes in order to
know this in
On 2/26/06, SunUp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi folks,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on their site, are now
over.
Ah, but when annoying little
Hi there
http://www.ilisys.com.au/
Get a new ISP dudedon't just stand there and break
Ray
At 02:16 PM 27/02/2006, you wrote:
Hi folks,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening
my
big mouth about
Hi,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on their site, are now
over.
[snip]
I'm astonished at the tone - although not especially surprised by the
Christian Montoya wrote:
On 2/26/06, SunUp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi folks,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on their site, are now
over.
I dropped a line to my ISP (ostensibly to enquire about my account)
and mentioned I could not find certain information on their website
(and suggested it might be a usability issue), that the horizontal
scrolling was giving me RSI (joke), commented on their massive use of
javascript in the
Well at least they're not using tables for layout :-)
On 27/02/06, SunUp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi folks,
I hereby publicly declare that my days of complaining to website
authors that I cannot view their site at 800x600, and then opening my
big mouth about other dubious issues I notice on
I have been courting disaster with a potential client on these points exactly.
I am risking losing a potentially valuable contract with my
standardista (and I am pretty moderate) standpoint. Heck, I'd just
like to get their sites to validate, but they are old-skool asp guys
who learned all there
I think you have come across a key lesson for the standards community:
techies know about standards, they are not ignorant, they just have
their own reasons (however lame) for not following them.
...which is why they can be a tough group to pitch to. They can be far
more set in their ways than
On 27/02/2006, at 4:08 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote:
Not to mention the fact that the people who implemented those
bohemoths can't always separate standards advice from personal
vilification - no matter how polite, rational, independently
verfiable...
I think its important to understand that, for
Lea de Groot wrote:
On 27/02/2006, at 4:08 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote:
Not to mention the fact that the people who implemented those
bohemoths can't always separate standards advice from personal
vilification - no matter how polite, rational, independently
verfiable...
I think its important
SunUp wrote:
Hi folks,
My own fault, I asked for it, obviously.
I will now be a good little backyard hobbyist web-designer as they
called me (actually, it's my day job too), and never mention
standards
again.
I don't think you need to go back to 10th grade, but - for your own
sake - you
Any business owner with half a brain would march that person straight out
the door.
Not only would I forward the offending email to management with a polite
assurance that I had not YET made the companies name public, but I would
follow it up with all the messages of outrage and disgust that
26 matches
Mail list logo
