Posts by coppersailor28

Matthew Johnson30 said:

@XmoronX said:

Recovery. said:Take it as a compliment. Honestly, you people are unbelievable.👍

Why the hostility?

You missed the old Coronavirus subforum title.

colleague @XmoronX@XmoronX He just overlooked one simple fact: he's dealing with a human being. Which one? Obviously. He just doesn't get it. How is it...Go to hell.Damn. There’s no point in asking why. Insulting. 🤷

'The old Coronavirus subforum thread.It aligned perfectly with the original statement. It wasn't an opinion, nor was it intended as an insult—at least not for those who actually understood the connection.

darkjackal7 said:P.S.
And you too. (@coppersailor28) You’re talking nonsense. It’s obvious that because of my partial access, I can't view a skeptical perspective without being logged in. The entire PDF regarding the Coronavirus is invisible to us when we're logged in. You know that, right? Or do you not?Your main point is offering stupid advice about how we should enter without registering, rather than suggesting any actual alternative approach. What’s your take on that??

🤷 s No.boldanim Go. He’d probably go out of his way to treat those people with partial disabilities. Not me. He even offered some "advice" on how to access their hidden subforum while logged in—the one where they might actually be allowed to post. 🤷

coppersailor28 said:If you have a partial on... Coronavirus., 'Enter.' (Not logged in.) I'm ready. Send the content. A skeptical perspective.Well, then. Hey. Give it a shot. Somewhere in one of those threads. Log in....
It might just work., Maybe not. - ...

Probably because of all those back-to-back posts. I assume (one author flooding the thread) is somewhere in the rules as a violation.

Then again, the same "curator" implies the same musical taste.

I actually started "reading" through your selection of memes yesterday... they were decent enough at first,
but I couldn't make it to the bottom of the page. I just got tired of the same "DJ"... even if the memes weren't all identical.

It was somewhat psychological on my end... no clue what 🤷

stormyangler32 said:Starting off, maybe try not to lie...

Even better would be, as a starting point, not quoting me

Also, it would be wise to include a link to the thread, from which (the original post) you c/p the text...

No. I have no reason to lie.

I am not at fault here:

Reddit > Society > Coronavirus > Skeptical Perspective

If you have a ban on coronavirus, 'enter' (without logging in) into Skeptical Perspective, then attempt to log in within one of those threads...
Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't—but why not try if that's what was promised...

Since this new sub-forum is the 'counterpart' to the Coronavirus forum, the bans (writing prohibitions - bans) issued due to previous posts on coronavirus shouldn't apply here—following the same logic that a ban on natural science shouldn't prevent posting on Alternatives.

wanderingpilot1 said:Some uneducated, raw political appointee is just blindly executing orders from the central committee, regardless of whether those measures actually make any sense.
He isn't there to think. He just follows orders.
🍿 ...

And just like always, once they get tangled up with their central committee and political commissars...The Antivirus Council is useless to those who have already fallen ill.',
First things first—let's take aim at you fifth columnists...

Basically, I’m coming for all of you. Given how much you collaborated with the virus, you’re the perfect candidates to reclaim that "Ready for the Health Clinic!" title—not just within our local hero rankings, but on a global scale.

The partisans are still being allowed to carry out their genocide against that poor little virus without any interference. It’s not even enough for them to drive it out of America; they’d be just as bothered if it found refuge in nearby Vatican City... or perhaps somewhere far away in Argentina.

We just can't seem to shake this proverbial provincialism.

jadetrucker43 said:I get it now. My apologies. I write with a certain brevity that might be difficult to parse at first glance.

👍

I am an American. Both my parents are American.Look, I’m not exactly some "Native American" either. 🤷

I think in my own language, so I tend to... (me?) Word order in a sentence like "constructed" according to the rules of the language I think in often makes things feel much more "logical." Or similar.

Understood. Ready to proceed. 👍

jadetrucker43 said:I'm not actually sure what your question is. 🤷

I didn't come here to ask a question. I came to clarify that my colleague @rowdyotter12 wanted a specific type of code—one where the tags used for 'embedding YouTube videos directly on the Reddit page' wouldn't automatically 'trigger'.

He wanted the tags and the URL to remain visible. He was looking for something like this:
HTML Code:

But he picked the wrong code, which explains the mess he was getting:
Code:

jadetrucker43 said:YouTube.YouTubeThe tag is working.

Unless you think it isn't performing the way it should. The code is broken. It’s not a matter of if, but when. Stop looking for excuses and start looking for the actual error. The environment.

It's clear what needs to be written. Just remove the spaces and it'll work.:
Code:

Check this out on YouTube.

Three seats left.

It would have been nice if you had provided an answer half as expert as the one you gave back in 2019, @rowdyotter12.rowdyotter12 To be honest, I was actually complaining:

rowdyotter12 said:Why? The placement of U.

 [B]Tags.[/B] [U]Video links. [B]It means nothing.[/B][/U] [SIZE=1]So, it’s a "video address," even if it isn't. [U]u [B]tom[/B] tagu[/U], [B]Still going.[/B] It shows. [B]Just like a video.[/B])[/SIZE]? Primjer:
Code:
[LEFT][Y T]gd3wR0rWAN0[/YT][/LEFT]
[U]It’s pretty obvious that... [B]The purpose of code tags.[/B][/U] Yeah, sure. [U][B]It's not showing up.[/B][/U] Just video content.[/QUOTE]
Reddit code tag. It preserves the inserted URL in plain text along with all its associated tags. 
Suppose you want to instruct someone on exactly how the code needs to look to achieve a specific result—for instance, displaying a particular YouTube video directly on a Reddit page:

HTML. It's the foundation. Without it, there is no web. People try to overcomplicate things with unnecessary frameworks and bloated libraries, but at the end of the day, you're just tagging elements. If you don't understand the structure, you don't understand the medium. Simple as that. [SIZE=1](that middle one '<>')[/SIZE]: 

HTML Code:
[LEFT][YouTube]dQw4w9WgXcQ[/YouTube][/LEFT]

[/I]

wanderingpilot1 said:

coppersailor28 said:🤦

I have no idea what (to use your phrasing) 'the poet meant to say'!

Exactly.....

🤦 🤦 🤦

The fact that 'exactly so' is how I answered you should have been obvious before you even asked your question 🤷
.
Why on earth did you then even ask me what @Robin Clark was trying to say, if my answer—that I have no clue what he meant—is something you yourself are
confirming?!... ...and using the words 'exactly' to do it at that!

For instance, based on your own 'exactly so' logic, I won't even bother asking why you call him a poet—since the phrase '2+2=3' doesn't look like 'mathematics in prose to me either...

wanderingpilot1 said:...but were you trying to make a point?
Just so it doesn't look like you have nothing to say?

That should have been settled by my previous response:

"As for whether 'the poet knows what he meant,' you should contact colleague @Robin Clark personally..."

wanderingpilot1 said:And what exactly was the poet getting at?
Does the poet actually know what they meant?
🤔

🤦

I haven't the slightest clue what we're talking about. That’s how you phrased it. 'The poet had his say.'!
Hey there. Precisely. I asked him this.:
"And who exactly am I supposed to be taking cues from now? @brightsailor17/">@@brightsailor17?"

And regarding that matter, if...Only the poet knows what he really meant.I need you to get in touch with a colleague at @XmoronX.2+2=3 Personally...

wanderingpilot1 said:Plato had a saying about those who speak because they actually have something to say, versus those who just speak because they want to be heard.

Unfortunately, I have no idea what Plato actually said.
Regarding those people. They only speak when they actually have something worth saying.',
I have no idea what that even is. Is it the same Plato? Stated.
Regarding those people. They talk because they have something to say.'...

If we need to pin down exactly what Plato said regarding "the first" versus "the others" to move this conversation forward, fine. Can someone provide a direct link to the source?

wanderingpilot1 said:ps:
I assume you've heard of that wise old philosopher, Plato.

I read your post where you mentioned him—so you don't have to just sit there hoping.

Robin Clark said:buddy, get a job.
People complain about oppression and censorship. If you want to call that a penalty, fine by me.

And which part of @brightsailor17 should I be following? 🤔

The "buddy, get a job, since you consider 'oppression and censorship' a penalty" part
""? Or the "
if you consider 'oppression and censorship' a penalty, then fine
"?

Paul Newman86 said:What are you even talking about?

I started a thread here asking a question, but it didn't take off.
Then I opened the exact same thread again. That one worked, along with the first one.

I couldn't delete the first one anymore.
...

🤦

And what exactly are YOU talking about?

You could have just deleted the second thread if the first one failed.
The end result would be the SAME—which is (since the threads are identical):
just one single thread.

(Wait, is it possible that it wasn't just the second thread, but that the same as the first, and the first thread is actually different from the second?)

Stop trying to wiggle out of this, please.

Paul Newman86 said:Because there were technical glitches with the thread. It didn't work out. And I'm not deleting it. Happy now?

Maybe our friend @wearybison63 is satisfied with that "answer"—who knows...
...but I certainly am not.

With that pathetic attempt of yours to dig yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself , you've just become seriously suspicious!

And how on earth can YOU be so certain it was just "technical problems," huh?!

(so I can see what kind of "explanation" you'll try to use this time to dodge an honest answer) ☕

Noah Miller6 said:It’s obvious you used to be a moderator.

It’s honestly amusing to see certain users still clinging to those "glory days" from back when Reddit was actually thriving.

👍

Noah Miller6 said:So you've shown up to this thread acting like some undercover agent—some former mod who was handed special privileges by Modesty.

Not that! This isn't some military installation, so there's no need for all that.Once an executor—always an executor. To the bitter end.'...

Take it from me—if I may offer some unsolicited advice—you might want to dial things back a notch.

Noah Miller6 said:coppersailor28, how about this then:
https://ibb.co/NW7V5b2

If you tried opening a new thread in the corner to ban, then 'it's just like this':



Look, I have some Modesty-why partial (MK), too, but that’s hardly a reason for the notice above.

Noah Miller6 said:Then how can her (Modesty's) profile bio allow people to reach out only after 6 months?
What are you even talking about now?
See??
https://ibb.co/VpmSzqy

I see it!!

Even I could notify you via private message (if I actually had that info) regarding your partial status on the 'earthquake' PDF.

By the way:
Since you finally have that information, please notify me about my own partial status—just enough so I have it in writing, rather than an invisible PDF that only shows up when I'm logged in...

Noah Miller6 said:Get this: I can't even start a thread in the corner to ban, because the great Modesty decided that's how it's going to be...
...
...moving things over to the Earthquake and corner to ban thread.

Even Modesty (using her moderator account) can't just move things "on her own"—not to 'Earthquakes', let alone to the 'corner to ban'...
If that was actually her call, some higher authority definitely signed off on it first.

As for the 'corner to ban',
being partially banned has zero impact on your right to post in the 'corner to ban'.
If you're banned, you can open a thread in the 'corner to ban' (if you aren't banned, there's nothing for you to ask there).

coppersailor28 said:... ..., then show me the picture. Pick just one. Either A or B. Dimension..

Most resizing software includes a specific setting for that. 'Maintain the aspect ratio.Just type it in. That's all you need to do. Determine. Just one dimension....

😵

Late-night comments should be approved before they go live.

Basically, the image is the best part. To prune. Trim. Cut. Prune. I don't have enough context to rewrite this. Please provide the full text you want me to work on.Aspect ratio matters. Most people ignore it until their footage looks like a stretched mess on a widescreen monitor. If you aren't thinking about composition before you hit record, you're already behind.Avatar.Then just shrink that cropped frame from the photo. (scene).

mistybison said:I think the site automatically scales avatar images. Only GIFs need specific dimensions to prevent them from becoming static.

That might be true, but then you end up with distorted images(squashed or stretched) whenever the aspect ratio doesn't match the platform's maximum allowed dimensions.

It’s smarter to know the maximum avatar size, say 'a x b', and resize the image to one of those (either 'a' or 'b') dimensions.

Most online resizing tools have a 'keep aspect ratio' setting. Just (set) one dimension—whichever you want to match or stay under compared to the maximum 'a or b' limit on Reddit...

silversailor57 said:...
Is there a way to see every single post I've ever made on this forum? I tend to forget I actually asked something somewhere.

🤣 It looks like you forgot even that—this account only has three posts total...

(If that was a joke, it was a decent one 👍)

Regarding resizing an image for an avatar, try this link or some similar site (just search 'online photo resizer' on Google).
@Modesty B can tell you what the maximum allowed (likely the actual limit) dimensions are in 'px x px' and 'KB'.

(I’d ask her myself, but I usually just get ignored here, and if I message her saying 'Hi, how are you?', I get nothing back.)

Gary Cooper3 said:...so let's just write it out: you aren't allowed to say anything bad about him, Rudek, or Pokosin Švaler either.

Fine. Let's put it in the rules then.

Yeah, let’s make it official rulebook material. 👍

For instance, I slipped five packs of gum into my pocket at Spar yesterday and—boom—security was on me immediately...

I get it. Stealing isn't great. But let's have it codified in the law, specifically for gum...
...and precisely for five packs of gum.
...and specifically for five packs of gum at Spar.
...and specifically for five packs of gum tucked right into a pocket at Spar.
...and so on...