Registration has been disabled and the moderation extension has been turned off.
Contact an admin on Discord or EDF if you want an account. Also fuck bots.

Talk:Randi Harper

From Encyclopedia Dramatica
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by imported>Oddguy at 13:42, 2 June 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

dead img

 VX  05:44, 1 October 2014 (EDT)

Did she really try to sell her kid?

  • I need to know. oddguy 15:27, 23 November 2014 (EST)
CobaltCat 15:32, 23 November 2014 (EST)

Bribing ED

Is it true that she's trying to bribe SysOps to get this article down? That would be funny...--Sveracrux 11:54, 26 November 2014 (EST)

No. CobaltCat 11:57, 26 November 2014 (EST)

Columns

Why? Did someone forget that the way a person reads a webpage is different from the way a person reads a newspaper or magazine article? Professional newspapers don't use columns in their online articles. Why are they being used here? It's bad for readability and usability. You're forcing readers to scroll down, then scroll up, and then scroll down again. Remember that not everyone has large monitor, and this would made reading the page on a tabloid tablet frustrating. Also, you're forcing the reader to tilt their heads to the right or left instead of looking straight ahead. With newspapers, you can move the newspaper instead of moving your head, but the same can't be done with a desktop monitor. --JuniusThaddeus 08:25, 6 December 2014 (EST)

Tabloid? You mean a tablet? Seriously fuck people who use tablets. They are worthless scum. As for the rest of your points:

1) The divs I used to wrap everything are like 99% responsive and use percentage based widths. Their size is completely dependent on the reader's screen size.

2) Do you know how shitty some of the pages on ED look for common monitor resolutions let alone widescreen? Why are there almost zero articles designed to take advantage of 1600px considering most of our traffic is probably from desktops? I'm not going to look at a god damn article and not find a way to creatively use the screen space just because some nerd browsing on his iPhone is slightly inconvenienced. Furthermore, ED isn't even mobile friendly, why should I care if someone who can zoom pinch pretty much anything they come across has to use it.

3) This article is getting significant attention currently and looks to only be getting more attention in the future. I designed this layout specifically to be unique and take advantage of that exposure. I wanted it to stand out even for people who read our site frequently. They're going to read it no matter what format it uses and I'd rather it look interesting so readers are encouraged to spread/post about it. Maximum readability can get fucked, I want it to catch people's attention.

Take a guess why it doesn't look like a professional newspaper. Because ED isn't a newspaper. It's a wiki. Wiki pages do not look like newspapers. They do not share much in common with newspapers. I can make it look however I want it to fucking look.

4) I'm not proposing we do this for every article, most articles, some articles, or under any circumstances unless someone wants to copy it. Love it, hate it, who cares. I'm not advocating that anyone else emulate what I've done with it. It's one article.

5) Why the fuck is my article so interesting to you all of a sudden? You haven't been helping me add to it or update. There is an entire wiki's worth of articles with shitty layouts. Go find something constructive to work on if it bothers you so much. - Phobos 10:17, 6 December 2014 (EST)

The results of your handiwork:
--JuniusThaddeus 11:42, 6 December 2014 (EST)
looks same to me.--Talk to me|Contribs 13:26, 6 December 2014 (EST)
Aight I'll move my version over to test space until it works. Some of picture frames are set to exact pixels which is dumb as shit. - Phobos 13:58, 6 December 2014 (EST)
Thanks. --JuniusThaddeus 16:05, 6 December 2014 (EST)
So the good news is I fixed everything and there are no serious problems with it. The bad news is if you are still rocking a 1024px screen (or similar) despite that in a few days the year will be 2015, well then I have no sympathy for you, lol. Pretty much every single resource I could have possibly used to avoid saddling small screen readers with the horizontal scroll bar was/is closed off or unavailable. You can't even use in-page style sheets and wiki's image embed function does not recognize percentage values. Whatevs, I'm still pretty happy with it. However, should you or anyone you know become inconvenienced by it well then tough shit, you can just fucking deal with it. Maybe you should stop browsing the Internet on antique hardware. It's called New Egg nigga. New screens cost like 100bux. - Phobos 21:54, 6 December 2014 (EST)
Alright. Thanks for the effort. --JuniusThaddeus 22:33, 6 December 2014 (EST)

Randi Vs. Fucking Anne Rice