to play in.
But MPs have to work on things as a whole, not take populist decisions.
Oh right.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah Slater
Sent: 28 November 2007 22:06
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/29/it.internet
On 29/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's just so bloody facetious.
Welcome to teh
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whilst were are at it, every room in the Houses of Parliament
should be on CCTV, transmitted online 24 hours a day. And
Number 10. And all the Ministry's.
This is _so_ unlikely, because a lot of politicians are (and I mean
this in a
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Dave Crossland wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Billy Abbott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is naieve to think that a choice of providers will have identical
functionality.
I wasn't clear - I meant common open APIs, ie. the same API with different
vendors behind it. That way they
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of vijay chopra
It was only one idea, I'm sure that there are others. who knows,
one of them might even including resurrecting the noble art of
journalism
Deirdre Harvey wrote:
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will
have completed the prototype of the journalist that doesn't need
food or shelter?
Well, someone here at BBC RD presented a (tongue-in-cheek) design for
an android journalist at an internal new
Billy Abbott wrote:
In order to get the gatekeepers to offer that software they need to have
an incentive to do so. Apart from idealistic ones who are doing it for
the reason of wanting the software to be free, I don't currently see
what the incentive is for the others. While I'd like to be
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of vijay chopra
It was only one idea, I'm sure that there are others. who knows, one of them
might even including resurrecting the noble art
It was only one idea, I'm sure that there are others. who knows, one of
them might even including resurrecting the noble art of journalism as a
public service rather than to make money.
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will have
completed the prototype of the
Journalists in terms of national newspapers and national broadcasters
aren't needed in modern society. We could easily and happily do without
them.
Really? Why's that then?
Rich.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 November 2007 12:11
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
Journalists in terms
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Lockwood
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
It was only one idea, I'm sure that there are others. who knows, one of them
might even including resurrecting the noble art
On 28/11/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
**
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will have
completed the prototype of the journalist that doesn't need food or shelter?
I believe that it's called the professional
On 28/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
So can you give us any indication of when the technologists will have
completed the prototype of the journalist that doesn't need food or shelter?
Apparently it's already with us. It's called a 'blogger. Can't
generally write for
On 28/11/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 28/11/2007, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, where I've referred to Free in the context of this discussion
I have generally meant libre, not gratis.
Why should people who do important jobs in the
On the subject of citizen journalists, if I could generalize, I'd say
it's quite true that we work for free and have to support ourselves by
other means. Yet we feel that some stories should be covered that both
the mainstream press and the specialised press cover superficially, or
not at all, or
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would start by constructing Acts of Parliament by Wiki for a start.
ROFLCOPTOR!!!1
--
Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the results. - R.
On 28/11/2007, Sean DALY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the subject of citizen journalists, if I could generalize, I'd say
it's quite true that we work for free and have to support ourselves by
other means. Yet we feel that some stories should be covered that both
the mainstream press and the
I would start by constructing Acts of Parliament by Wiki for a start.
If that isn't a job creation scheme for lawyers I don't what is...
May it please the court to get back to the matter in hand, is a
blaspheme against the Flying Spaghetti Monster still a crime if it is
was spoken in LOLCAT by
On 28/11/2007, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would start by constructing Acts of Parliament by Wiki for a start.
If that isn't a job creation scheme for lawyers I don't what is...
May it please the court to get back to the matter in hand, is a
blaspheme against the Flying
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's just so bloody facetious.
Welcome to teh intrawebs: serious business.
Whilst were are at it, every room in the Houses of Parliament should be on
CCTV, transmitted online 24 hours a day. And Number 10. And all the
Ministry's.
On 29/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 28/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's just so bloody facetious.
Welcome to teh intrawebs: serious business.
Whilst were are at it, every room in the Houses of Parliament should be
on
CCTV, transmitted online
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are Dave
Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds.
We are different people; that £5 belongs to me.
-- Regards,Dave
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
You are Dave Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds.
We are different people; that £5 belongs to me.
Hmm. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
:-)
Rich.
On 27/11/2007, Billy Abbott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Noah Slater wrote:
but what happens when
That's the reason why having open APIs that multiple sites conform to
strikes me as an excellent idea - if your provider of choice does up and
go away you can just switch the
On Tuesday 27 November 2007 09:26:51 Dave Crossland wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You
are Dave Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds.
We are different people; that £5 belongs to me.
I've met both Noah and Dave and can confirm this :-)
On 27/11/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You
are Dave Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds.
We are different people; that £5 belongs to me.
-- Regards,Dave
I can confirm that these are real people,
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. Banging on and on and on and on about the same tired, laboured point is
wrong - and simply blindly quoting Richard Stallman doesn't make it any more
likely to have people agree with your narrow viewpoint. You are Dave
Crossland in
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 08:52 +, Michael Sparks wrote:
I'd assumed that people would understand the concept of analogy and
meme.
A generation brought up on Reithian values would, but now it's all
East Enders, and other reality shows :^/
- Richard
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk
No. Banging on and on and on and on about the same tired, laboured
point is
wrong - and simply blindly quoting Richard Stallman doesn't make it any
more
likely to have people agree with your narrow viewpoint. You are Dave
Crossland in a different hat, and I claim my five pounds.
Noah
On 27 Nov 2007, at 10:57, Noah Slater wrote:
To which I have two suggestions:
1) Leave the /discussion/ list you're on.
2) Move to the next message, trash the message and move on.
3) Filter all email with freedom in the body into /dev/null and be
done with it.
My fourth suggestion
On 27/11/2007, Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My fourth suggestion would be that perhaps the discussion you want to
have is not on topic for a list. As such continuing the discussion you
want to have may be off topic for most list members.
On this list the noise is the signal and you
On 27/11/2007, Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My fourth suggestion would be that perhaps the discussion you want to
have is not on topic for a list. As such continuing the discussion you
want to have may be off topic for most list members.
As to whether this list is an advocacy list
My fourth suggestion would be that perhaps the discussion you want to
have is not on topic for a list. As such continuing the discussion you
want to have may be off topic for most list members.
On this list the noise is the signal and you are invited to use filters.
Noise. Note noise.
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...you can minimise false positive terms by running the copy
through several different flavours of term extractor, and only using
terms thrown up by x or more of them (where x depends on your appetite
for false positives vs false
On 27/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 26 November 2007 20:20:30 Dave Crossland wrote:
That's the point - using web APIs is giving up your software freedom,
because you are getting someone else to do your computation; you have
no way of studying, understanding, or
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On this list the noise is the signal and you are invited to use filters.
Noise. Note noise. Not Shouting.
I THINK WE ARE HAVING A JOLLY OLD TIME DEBATING THE MERITS OF SOFTWARE
FREEDOM, AND THAT THERE WILL NEVER BE AN END TO IT IS
.
Or just change the post title and start a new post :
Free Software Nonsense was (Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage)
That way this thread about MuddyBoots is actually useful to anyone who
wants to find out about it and anybody who wants to talk about Free
Software Nonsense can do
: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On this list the noise is the signal and you are invited to use filters.
Noise. Note noise. Not Shouting.
I THINK WE ARE HAVING A JOLLY OLD TIME DEBATING THE MERITS OF SOFTWARE
FREEDOM
On 27/11/2007, Nick Reynolds-AMi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
Making more things free and open only benefits a small group of
technologists who are clever enough to know how to use the results.
I see no problem with this, in fact it's a good thing, it
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of vijay chopra
Sent: Tue 11/27/2007 4:13 PM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Muddy Boots on Backstage
On 27/11/2007, Nick Reynolds-AMi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me play devil's advocate
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Dave Crossland wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Billy Abbott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Noah Slater wrote:
but what happens when
That's the reason why having open APIs that multiple sites conform to
strikes me as an excellent idea - if your provider of choice
On 27/11/2007, Billy Abbott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is naieve to think that a choice of providers will have identical
functionality.
I wasn't clear - I meant common open APIs, ie. the same API with different
vendors behind it. That way they will offer very similar levels of
On 27/11/2007, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Nick Reynolds-AMi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
Making more things free and open only benefits a small group of
technologists who are clever enough to know how to use the
On 27/11/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Billy Abbott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is naieve to think that a choice of providers will have identical
functionality.
I wasn't clear - I meant common open APIs, ie. the same API with
different
vendors
Nutritionists and Dietitians are just artisans of couse, whereas we
programmers are computer scientists, no?
Dietitians have real courses of study, and qualifications from respectable
institutes of learning. Nutritionists don't. (See Gillian McKeith /
Patrick Holford etc...)
Listen to
On 27/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, and I'm suggesting that a common API will be a base that each
gatekeeper will add bespoke features too. I'll be surprised if similar
services offered with a common open API from Google and Yahoo and
Microsoft do not have any
On 27/11/2007, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nutritionists and Dietitians are just artisans of couse, whereas we
programmers are computer scientists, no?
Dietitians have real courses of study, and qualifications from respectable
institutes of learning. Nutritionists
On 27/11/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/11/2007, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, and I'm suggesting that a common API will be a base that each
gatekeeper will add bespoke features too. I'll be surprised if similar
services offered with a common
Hi, Rob - this is neat, though not entirely sure that it's working
entirely as you might want...
http://muddyboots.rattleresearch.com/cgi-bin/mb.cgi?action=pageid=701
http://muddyboots.rattleresearch.com/cgi-bin/mb.cgi?action=pageid=701
...a page about The Sun (and the News of the World)
Am I on the right list ?
We seem to have ended up discussing the merits, bugs, inner workings of
a prototype.
Whatever next !
could be used ...)
Hi, Rob - this is neat, though not entirely sure that it's working
entirely as you might want...
Thanks for the feedback !
Muddy boots is cool...
TheyWorkForYou.com adds links to Hansard by matching Proper Names with
Wikipedia entries.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-11-21a.1190.1
The number false positives is acceptable and the wikipedia links are
miles better than the
How about using a two-frame page as the link with a rate this link option
shown as a one-line toolbar at the top of the page? Users could then rate
the appropriateness of the link from wrong to fantastic, which would
allow automatic removal of incorrect links and an simple administration list
of
Personally, I'd prefer an XML API for most things like this... no worrying
about porting it to your platform of choice, less/no hardware cost, probably
(maybe) faster, less maintenance etc.
J
--
Jason Cartwright
Web Specialist, EMEA Marketing
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+44(0)2070313161
On 26/11/2007,
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I'd prefer an XML API for most things like this... no worrying
about porting it to your platform of choice, less/no hardware cost, probably
(maybe) faster, less maintenance etc.
No worrying about freedom, either, though...
On 26/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- The BBC has at least one *excellent* term extractor in house which
adds extra metadata like 'this term is a person/place/topic'... would
be a lovely API to offer, hint hint...
API?
You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if their
terms or tech are better. Just change the URL and a few XPaths in a config
file.
J
On 26/11/2007, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I'd prefer
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I'd prefer an XML API for most things like this... no worrying
about porting it to your platform of choice, less/no hardware cost, probably
(maybe) faster, less maintenance etc.
Me too, great for doing some AJAX.
J
--
Tom Loosemore wrote:
Thanks for the feedback !
Muddy boots is cool...
Thanks :)
TheyWorkForYou.com adds links to Hansard by matching Proper Names with
Wikipedia entries.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-11-21a.1190.1
The number false positives is acceptable and the
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if their
terms or tech are better. Just change the URL and a few XPaths in a config
file.
To talk of the freedom to stop using a data source is absurd.
The Ordanance
On 26/11/2007, Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/me sits down with big tub of pop corn and expectantly googly eyes...
/me puts on his flame retardant suit and rubs on the troll repellent
--
Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far
Brian Butterworth wrote:
How about using a two-frame page as the link with a rate this link
option shown as a one-line toolbar at the top of the page? Users
could then rate the appropriateness of the link from wrong to
fantastic, which would allow automatic removal of incorrect links
and an
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given you can't have both (the source code isn't owned by the BBC) I'd
be happy with open data.
Open data would be fantastic, free software + open data would be better.
See my sig.
I did. Cathy Come Home would seem to disprove it as a
On 26/11/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We didn't spend 25 years getting faster computers and larger hard disks
so we could run all our applications over a network and have third
parties store our data.
I think having services in the cloud is an immensely useful thing -
only that they
On 26/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given you can't have both (the source code isn't owned by the BBC) I'd
be happy with open data.
Open data would be fantastic, free software + open data would be better.
See my sig.
No... that isn't what I said.
J
On 26/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if
their
terms or tech are better. Just change the URL and a few XPaths in a
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People were not free (as in freedom) to choose whether or not they
wanted to pay for Cathy Come Home to be made in the first place. It
they had been granted the freedom not to pay the licence fee, it would
never have been made.
This could
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No... that isn't what I said.
You said:
You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API if
their terms or tech are better.
I think any reasonable person would paraphrase this as you have
freedom to stop using it.
To
Matt Lee wrote:
Jason Cartwright wrote:
That doesn't really seem to be the way things are going...
It's certainly not the way some would like to take things. It's
certainly one of the things that 'Web Twenty' promotes, but I think it's
a mistake.
We didn't spend 25 years getting
I was referring to Term Extraction APIs. There are plenty, so it doesn't
really matter which one you use... you are free to choose.
J
On 26/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No... that isn't what I said.
You said:
You
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was referring to Term Extraction APIs. There are plenty, so it doesn't
really matter which one you use... you are free to choose.
Yes, but if they are all restrictive with the data silos then all you
have is the freedom to choose which
People were not free (as in freedom) to choose whether or not they
wanted to pay for Cathy Come Home to be made in the first place. It
they had been granted the freedom not to pay the licence fee, it would
never have been made.
This could be said about the decisions of any public body.
With internet speeds increasing these online systems are very useful for
the average user who sends emails, writes letters, etc, as they take away
the burden of looking after software and keeping it up to date.
Or another way of looking it, if you keep building systems with the
expectation
They are restrictive data silos for a reason - they contain proprietary data
and code. They contain proprietary data and code for a reason - it was
easier and cheaper to build them that way.
Given that these systems aren't going to be released in their entirety (at
least not in the near future,
On 26/11/2007, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But in this case, API would easily trump source code and
dictionary/thesarus with patches IMHO - API could react within minutes
to a sudden change in the significance of a term. Who would want to
wait 15 days lag for a patch to keep
Adam wrote:
You could argue that computers started this way 25 years ago with a
central mainframe storing all the data centrally and we moved away from
this architecture due to limited connection speeds.
Or because the cost of running one big computer and a bunch of dumb
terminals became
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They are restrictive data silos for a reason - they contain proprietary data
and code.
This is a tautology.
They contain proprietary data and code for a reason - it was
easier and cheaper to build them that way.
Do you have the
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This could be said about the decisions of any public body.
your point being? (The BBC is not 'any public body' - it is unique in
being funded by a hypothecated regressive tax. )
My point being your point is irrelevant.
In the case of
On 26/11/2007, Matt Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] other supermarket chains are available
Prove it.
--
Noah Slater http://www.bytesexual.org/
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the results. - R. Stallman
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk
On 26/11/2007, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have complete freedom - you can go and use someone else's API
That's the point - using web APIs is giving up your software freedom,
because you are getting someone else to do your computation; you have
no way of studying,
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's such dogma which gets you described by otherwise pretty measured
civil servants and MPs as 'The Copyleft Taliban'
lol
Do you have a reference for that? :-)
http://www.vivisimo.com/search?query=%22copyleft+taliban%22
I disagree entirely with your hypothetical link between cost of
creative production and the freedoms that should be awarded to
society. Copyright and trademark law were specifically designed to
give away a little bit of societal freedom in exchange for stimulated
creativity.
I agree with all
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's such dogma which gets you described by otherwise pretty measured
civil servants and MPs as 'The Copyleft Taliban'
This would be highly offensive and on a par with Godwin's Law.
I guess I'm just bored of placard waving. I want to
On 26/11/2007, Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's such dogma which gets you described by otherwise pretty measured
civil servants and MPs as 'The Copyleft Taliban'
This would be highly offensive and on a par with Godwin's
On Monday 26 November 2007 20:20:30 Dave Crossland wrote:
That's the point - using web APIs is giving up your software freedom,
because you are getting someone else to do your computation; you have
no way of studying, understanding, or modifying the computation done
behind the API.
Wrong -
On Monday 26 November 2007 20:32:49 Tom Loosemore wrote:
It takes patience, time and - most importantly - evidence to
demonstrate that re-use can be a good thing for all concerned.
Even then, consider:
* Copyright was created as a mechanism to benefit the public as a
mechanism to
On Monday 26 November 2007 21:14:20 Noah Slater wrote:
This would be highly offensive and on a par with Godwin's Law.
Oh, I don't know Mind Performance Hacks has a suggestion based on the analogy
of Memes - Enjoy Good, Clean Memetic Sex - which appears to take a couple
of analogies one step too
On 27/11/2007, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately, some people have memes that they feel compelled to
evangelize at all costs, and they won't stop when they're told to.
Memetically, this is the equivalent of rape. Avoid memetic rapists,
and respect the
Basically the author is saying that anyone who has strong opinions is
committing the equivalent of rape. Now, ignoring the highly
inappropriate analogy to forced sexual penetration, I think that you
could sum this up as having strong opinions and sticking by them is
wrong. which is clearly
Rob,
This is an interesting - and very subtle - enhancedment to the BBC news
pages. Took me a while to spot what was being added, so well was it done.
I was wondering if you could modify it so that it could also add links to
Wikipedia articles by adding hypertext links within the text.
For
Brian, I also missed the very subtle changes to the page- but I would
say, hyperlinking scientists and headaches etc every other word is
gonna give the reader sore eyes and thousands of hours of lost work as
they educate themselves in mass trivia.
And to Rob, respect for your project; from a user
On 22/11/2007, James Ockenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian, I also missed the very subtle changes to the page- but I would
say, hyperlinking scientists and headaches etc every other word is
gonna give the reader sore eyes and thousands of hours of lost work as
they educate themselves in
James Ockenden wrote:
Brian, I also missed the very subtle changes to the page- but I would
say, hyperlinking scientists and headaches etc every other word is
gonna give the reader sore eyes and thousands of hours of lost work as
they educate themselves in mass trivia.
So, if we discount the
On 22/11/2007, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Ockenden wrote:
Brian, I also missed the very subtle changes to the page- but I would
say, hyperlinking scientists and headaches etc every other word is
gonna give the reader sore eyes and thousands of hours of lost work as
they
94 matches
Mail list logo
