f13.net

Hi,

Does this board allow you to ignore certain users?  If yes, someone point me in the right direction.

Sure we do.  It's mostly an user driven function though.

1.  See user you want to ignore.
2.  Ignore post of user.
3.  Continue reading/posting.

But what if that user changes their avatar and I accidentally read their post and become upset? Can I contact a mod and get them banned? Will Schild compensate me for emotional damages? Maybe I should raise this in the legal advice thread...

 :awesome_for_real:

The simple and best solution to your problem is to stay out of the politics forum.

thanks for replying.

I know some other forum software supports this, wasn't sure about this one.

If you changed your avatar to match your antagonist, it would be fun and confusing.

I don't get the Lady Gaga avatar.

Edit:
I need a new avatar I think.

So who are you trying to ignore?

Various people in the Health Reform thread in the politics forum I'm guessing.

I should have turned my asshole quotient up, sorry.


There we go.

No it does not.

Nor will the function be enabled should it ever become available.

I'm not sure anyone gets Lady Gaga. Which is her point, maybe. It's hard to tell. She could just be completely insane.

She can sing, though. Got to give her credit for that.

Supposedly she used to be a fairly normal, talented musician that didn't sell too well or get much attention. Then she started calling herself Lady Gaga and acting like a loon. Clearly she's crazy :awesome_for_real:

Commenting on how strange/odd a musician is mean only one thing.  You are now your parents, congratulations.

I was only speculating on the choice of having her as an avatar, not as a musician.

I was firmly convinced that Lady Gaga was packing a pin bigger than most guys, but the video that avatar is from cleared up all doubt. Unless they spent a billion dollars on CGI to get rid of it, she's all girl parts, shaved, and has a pretty nice body. Without all the batshit crazy costumes, hair, and makeup she's actually very pretty if you like Mediterranean/Arab facial features.In that picture she's wearing a pair of glasses covered in lit cigarettes out into some sort of transvestite prison exercise yard.

1080p version of the "explicit" version of Telephone here on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ95z6ywcBY&feature=player_embedded). No actual nudity, but I'd probably not watch it at work.

But didn't you hear, Lady Gaga is a puppet of the Illuminati (http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=1676)   :oh_i_see:

Hmmmmmm...

"Project Monarch"... Female with questionable sexual characteristics... Bizarre costumes...

Oh my god. Lady Gaga is actually Dr. Mrs. The Monarch!!!!!!

Honestly, my day is now complete.  :drillf:

I don't see the point of ignore lists, really.  At least not here.  If someone's behaviour is so awful or if they're being obvious trolls or something, just point it out to the mods and they'll ask them to stop.  If they persist, Schild or Trippy will probably ban them.  Well, of course if it's Trippy or Schild who's bothering you, you're stuffed. 

Anyway, who's annoying you so bad that you want them banished from your eyes?  I'm just nosy.  I tried to look myself but I couldn't stand it in there for long enough.  SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT'S HAPPENING!!

Oh good, I'm not the only one who has that thought.  I chuckle when I hear folks do it all the time, "fucking kids and their weird shit."  Hell, I even laugh at myself when I slip into the trap.

it's..... political

Just to be clear:

Slog, if we had an ignore function, most people probably wouldn't have noticed you made this thread.

In the interest of testing that hypothesis:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1159

Perhaps slog is asking about ignore lists as a favor for the rest of us trying to wade through the politics forum right now?

Not available. :cry:

Schild is really quick with those ouchie zingers lately!  I think he's been sleeping on a pea at night and it's made him cranky and strangely clever.

Actually this would have more to do with something else entirely. But let's call it "sleeping on a pea at night."

I'm not entirely certain how to respond to that.

Don't respond to it how you think you would respond to it which prompted you say that you don't know how to respond to it. In fact, just don't respond to it.

Throw caution to the wind!

If we had ignore lists there wouldn't be a politics forum.

They autotuned the shit out of that song.

Nowadays you only can tell whether or not someone actually can sing by watching them live. The studio magic is strong in all of the current billboard stars and you can do a lot of awesome shit with mediocre vocal tracks today.

My first real exposure to Lady Gaga was seeing her on Saturday Night Live wearing a giant steel gyroscope, and then attempting to sit down at a piano while still wearing it.

As to the original post, I took it as an attemp to lure more folks in to the shared misery of some of the various Politics threads.

You know for the longest time I thought the phrase was "Throw kosh into the wind" I didn't know what people had against B5

I just saw the Lady Gaga video and thought that would be an interesting avatar.

If I had the chance, I would roll a new toon in wow that had Cigarette Sunglasses.

she's a bit weird for me, though her music isn't awful.

Soda cans in her hair? /burning/ cigarettes for sunglasses? Making out with a super butch girl?

She did look pretty hot in the crime scene tape.

I suppose there could be a whole thread about Lady Ga Ga and her modern day Madonna schtick.

I've seen a video of her performing when she was a regular looking teen.  She does have a great voice.

Can't remember where or why the hell I read it, but she turned down Juilliard to pursue feigned insanity.

edit: adding sense to the post... jesus christ working two jobs is making me scatterbrained (more than normal).

My brother (singer/songwriter working towards a teaching cert for special needs kids) rants about that a lot. He was born with an okay voice that got damaged from a lot of strep (or something) when he was young, so the best he can aspire to is -- as he puts it "Billy Corrigan On Key" because he's just got a gravelly aspect that just won't go away.

But he's worked hard to expand his range, train his voice, and sings the music that he writes. He loathes auto-tuning and studio tuning for music. Says it's great for stuff like, oh, TV actors or movie stars singing (although he always prefers they'd cast someone who sings professionally) but hates when professional musicians do it.

He especially hates it when it's someone like Lady Gaga, who actually can sing without it. Just...doesn't.

Of course, he's also one of those holier-than-thou music snobs who could make a living selling what he writes, but won't because he doesn't want anyone else singing his stuff. Although that's not what makes him a music snob. Having a conversation about music is. Everytime I see Jack Black in High Fidelity, I'm reminded of my brother a bit. He's toned it down over the years, thank god.

When this thread started, who knew we would be discussing the finer points of Lady Gaga using autotune.  :headscratch:

Lady Gaga and autotune exactly? no. Thread redirection off original topic? of course and expected!

Studio time is expensive so why spend days actually rehearsing stuff and improving your vocal phrasings when you can take an OK 80% take and tune it? A lot of young talents suffer because of that.

Back in the olden days bands spent months in the studio which was good practice before going on tour especially when you are a young inexperienced musician and have the time (and the producers support) to improve.

I C wut U did thar.

The inefficiency of that loopscript makes baby Jesus cry.

It didn't work for me anyways. :cry:

Hee. I may end up teaching beginning programming at a local junior college, for fun and for vacation money. If I get the job, I'll have to post some of the better code snippets here.

I'm still really fond of this one:

char x = '1;
for(x=0;x<5;x++)
{

}


It took me twenty minutes to explain to him why that wouldn't work.

Seems like that should "work" perfectly well; the assignment in the for loop overrides the '1' assignment, and I don't think C will complain too much if you assign an int to a char.  

Now, if he'd been trying to count to 500 in that loop instead of 5...   :why_so_serious:

Try this. Works in the latest Greasemonkey. A bit rough, but it does what it's supposed to.

Edit:
Added the @include directive.

Edit 2:
Added ugly solution for restricting the functionality to certain subboards (or even topics) Just add strings to the "selectivePaths" array and set "enableSelectivePaths" to true. It's kinda picky with whitespace and such. Delimiter should be space, pipe (|), space and nothing else.

Edit 3:
Added quote ignore. It simply hides the body of any quotations of an ignored user. Enabled by default.

Somewhat a shame about the way SMF organises topics. Makes it difficult to set it for threads in politics only. Will require some more mangling to look for the forum name link...  :grin:

Added the functionality for you (and others I assume) Righ.

Wasn't Madanno Illuminati to?  :awesome_for_real:

Oh.  Hi There.

It was so long ago I have no idea what language it was. Only that he was treating a character like an int, and couldn't grasp that while the character might be a number, it wasn't an INTEGER and no, the computer didn't "know" it was a number.

Java probably.

Pascal?

I've tried to scrub everything about that language out of my brain though.

Edit:  Also a big :heart: to Tarami. ;D

(And another to Righ for leading the way to Bliss.  :wink:)

This GreaseMonkey-stuff was pretty fun :awesome_for_real:

I added support for quotes. Ignored users' quotes no longer show up except for username/date. The updated code is in the spoiler above.

I rather loathed Pascal, although nothing like my burning hatred of Ada. I get Ada -- it does exactly what it should, and it's designed for a specific purpose and it's really good at that purpose. It's still like jabbing a fork in your eye to code in it.

I only learned enough Pascal to pass the Computer Science AB AP test... mostly skimming a book on it the day before.

It's good at what it's designed for, or was. I haven't used it in a long time -- last time I used it it was just popping out an OO varient. For teaching new programmers or people without experience, it's rigid and hand-holding enough to force them to learn syntax and internalize basic algorithmic structure.

It's a decent learning tool, or was.

This thread is taking all kinds of crazy turns.

Thanks, very cool. I probably won't use it, I'm just facilitating trouble. ;)

This is the pre-crazy Lady Gaga clip, singing and playing piano as Stefani Germanotta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM51qOpwcIM

I work with a guy who is a huge pussy.  He and his wife use parental locks on their television to screen out PG-13 rated content so they won't accidentally see it or be tempted to watch it.  I think trying to screen out people on a message board makes you an even bigger pussy though.

That's the type of guy you tape hardcore tranny porn all over his front porch or tape it to the picture window.

Yeah but only after I'm done beating off to it.

Quoting so that all the people ignoring you can see that the quote function works.

In C/C++ you can actually do that just fine; a char is just a one-byte number, and '1' is just an alias for the number 49 (ASCII).  You can even do something like:

for ( char c = 'A' ; c <= 'Z' ; c++ )
{
   printf( "%c", c );
}

Java would probably pitch a fit about it, though, and a Java weenie would probably pitch a bigger one.   :why_so_serious:

You can do that in Java/C# too.

Yeah, I know you can loop a character through the ASCII codes, but he was treating it entirely like an int. C++ overloads enough functions to get away with that, but either raw C or Pascal doesn't.

char is novel in Java for being the *only* unsigned primitive data type in the language (also for being 16 bits wide, which may be a surprise for some folks).

One of my many small gripes about the language is the required cast when assigning to byte or char from int.

Regarding char in C, you most certainly can *always* treat it like an int, it always promotes to the larger type in expressions and larger types may be freely assigned to variables of type char.  The only gotcha is that it has a range of -128 to 127 (or 0 to 255 in some compilers, but less common these days).

If it's important, of course, you'd just declare the signedness to remove all doubt.   :grin:

Yup.  Something I look for when interviewing people.  Actually, now that I think about it, it'd be fun to work up a plausible situation where you should explicitly declare something signed char -- this is a bit more insidious, since the bulk of the time char is signed by default (need to check, might be per ANSI these days), but in some cases it can be unsigned.  As it is, candidates regularly fail to use an unsigned char when they need to.

gcc extensions make everything weird, too.  By strict language spec pointer math on void* is undefined and illegal, but the linux kernel, for example, relies on gcc treating it as valid and equivalent to char* for that purpose, which does avoid a lot of clunky casting things to char* to do address manipulation.

Sorry, I can't read you over the sound of how ignored you are. :drillf:

Edit: Trying to be more of a chill guy now.  Trying

... :oh_i_see:

Not impressed or amused.  You better put me on ignore if people are going to start posting shit like this, posters in glass houses should shut the fuck up about ignoring others.

Show us on the doll where the politics thread touched you.

It broke his funny bone!   :ye_gods:

When I interviewed for my current job, maybe 7 years ago? The manager for the section (ie: the guy what made the call) told me he was explicitly barred from quizzing me to determine my coding abilities, and had to rely on my resume, education, and references per HR guidelines. He then noted that the best way to interview someone, once you got past the basics, was yank up a piece of code that had 'caused some problems' and talk shop.

His 'piece of code' was a lovely collection of "Fucking hell!" bugs and obscure algorithms and techniques, with just enough comments and context for someone with a decent level of skill to explain what was going on and what went wrong.

To my everlasting shame (and I still blame it on the fact that I was four years out of doing raw C and had, in fact, been doing OO-stuff since) I did miss a function pointer, but once he pointed it out I was able to explain what the code was doing and why it wasn't working. (Specifically, a rather tricky little scope problem).

I used to show people who claimed C++ proficiency something like this:

int* five() // this function should return a pointer to the number 5
{
   int x = 2 + 3;
   return &x;
}

and ask what was wrong with it.  Most of them failed.   :facepalm:

Haven't done C++ for over a decade, but uh... scope? Doesn't that value go away once that function does, since it was declared within? Is the real way to do it is to pass a pointer that you want the value set of?

I limit myself to non-pointer and autotypedef'd languages.

Scope. The address holding int gets freed the moment the function is returned. It's actually a fairly common pointer mistake, or at least, it's one of the first things I look for when my program is crapping itself.

Was that part for me or slog?  I've got a great rant going, but realized you might have gotten my humor and were poking him, in which case it was mean spirited.

This thread has gone places! Remember, whenever you need a can of worms opened, count on me.

I'm pretty sure Hoax completely missed your point Lan. I'm not a betting man, and I'd bet on it

I WILL CUT YOU :angryfist: