Forum ettiquette

Booting, installing, newbie
Message
Author
Bruce B

#41 Post by Bruce B »

Reborn,

If I could instill an interest in all Linux users to learn the CLI and
scripting I would. My sadness is knowing I can't.

In MS days, I used to consider myself a serial batch programmer.
4DOS was powerful, but Command.com and it's limited internal
commands were sufficient when combined with other utilities.

Eventually I came to a point where I could claim expert DOS batch
programming skills.

I once read - If you like DOS batch scripting, you'll love Bash
scripting.

I never lost the love for the DOS batch scripting and so I love them
both.

The first thing I do when installing a Linux is look it over. Pull out
the terminal emulator, use some text editors and train it to behave
the way I want.

Wishing you success in your journey.

Bruce

Bruce B

#42 Post by Bruce B »

reborn wrote: You could put text urls in a different colour to attract the readers attention
Unlinked links are black and a PIA, I wish people would make them links unstead of just text URLS. The proceedure is too simple.

Our posts come in alternating white and bluish. Our links come in blue. The contrast is very poor. What I've been doing for a few years is bolding the text and it reads a lot better.

Here is a reference for you to see how it looks bolded. And fortunately this post was on the bluish background, which gives the lowest contrast.

Here is a reference without the bolding for comparison.

What do you think?

reborn
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed 30 Jul 2008, 07:44
Location: Turgutreis, Turkey

#43 Post by reborn »

Bruce B
I personally have no problem with clickable links - and the bold one is a great idea, my suggested Opera method (which is handy anyway) was based on this from nipper -
The way Flash described it is fine, when one puts a URL as a link. However it's possible to give one of those clickable links a name, for instance "click me" and then that is what is displayed. It's probably correct that a lot of people click links without examining where the link, which they have seen as a name, is actually going. It's fairly trivial then to craft a link that presents itself as something other than what it actually is. For example, give the link a name of the form of a URL, http://...etc. and then you have a link that goes somewhere different from where it presents. Many clickers would not notice.
For beginners I would agree with him, happened to me once in an email - shows one web address but the underlying link takes you elsewhere, usually an 'undesirable' site. Only happened the once! I looked into how they'd done it, forearmed is forewarned. From the brief time I've been using this forum I can't imagine it happening, but you never know who (not WhoDo..) is lurking.

Can you recommend any books for bash, as I'd like to have a 'bash' - couldn't resist it (doubt I'm the first) I've got three (pdf) books Wiley Linux Command Line and Shell Scripting Bible, Linux for Dummies & Linux Bible. Is bash 'shell scripting' ? Would one of those be a good place to start?

Ooops - just realised I should have searched the forum first before asking that, nevermind I'll still look but I'd value your opinion. Anyone else like to make a suggestion here please do.
Thanks

reborn

ICPUG
Posts: 1308
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 00:09
Location: UK

#44 Post by ICPUG »

QUOTE

Bruce B says:

Unlinked links are black and a PIA, I wish people would make them links unstead of just text URLS. The procedure is too simple.

UNQUOTE

I know, I know - but you have to see it from my side. When I am at work I have to run Windows and cannot install anything to free me from IE. When I am at home I like to run a very safe, fast browser.

In both cases this means 'OffByOne' is my browser - you've probably never heard of it but it doesn't need installing - does not allow active x, javascript ....

That simple procedure of clicking the URL button doesn't work with my browser so I use unlinked links.
(I have to manually quote text as well). If there are some text attributes I can apply manually (Like in old Wordperfect days) then tell me what they are and I might comply!

ICPUG

User avatar
shroomy_bee
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2008, 16:54
Contact:

#45 Post by shroomy_bee »

Ah, see my approach there is different: how can I put this......most folks that buy a PC / laptop do so for the following reasons:

surf internet, download from internet

play games, online and offline

write essays / letters

use email and things like messengers

watch videos, and video media & burn video

listen to audio

login to various buying and banking accounts

and sometimes do financial calcs


So, in other words they don't need to be using any kinds of commands anyway. What I mean is, they would be buying pre-builts with OSs installed and already configured.........so I tend to view anyone that wants to build or configure their own machines as needing to have the most complete info possible to get the job done.

I don't think it's wrong to only want GUI info to get the job done, it's just that if you're going to bother building your own then it's best to know as much about what you're actually doing as is possible.

In terms of the manual and guides - dare I say it, do what Microsoft do (well, they sometimes do) and provide a GUI and a CLI version alongside one another.

Bruce B

#46 Post by Bruce B »

ICPUG,

Sorry for the late reply. With JavaScript past the URL in, highlight it and push the URL button.

With no JavaScript as in your case at work, you can make a lickable clink this way:

<- opening tag | closing tag ->

Bruce

ICPUG
Posts: 1308
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 00:09
Location: UK

#47 Post by ICPUG »

Thanks for the info Bruce.

I am now just testing I understand it:

http://www.icpug.org.uk/national/linnwin/contents.htm

Yep - A preview tells me I do.

Now lets try quote
With JavaScript past the URL in, highlight it and push the URL button.
Yep - That works too.

Thanks again Bruce.

ICPUG

User avatar
sinc
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 22 Jul 2009, 20:35
Location: Tampa, FL USA

#48 Post by sinc »

WhoDo wrote: Even more importantly, if you started a thread to find the solution to a problem and the solution was forthcoming, please edit your original post to add [Solved] to the subject line.
I am sorry if this is obvious but could someone explain to me how to do this. I have yet to figure it out. :oops:

puppyite

This subject is [SOLVED]

#49 Post by puppyite »

sinc wrote:
WhoDo wrote: Even more importantly, if you started a thread to find the solution to a problem and the solution was forthcoming, please edit your original post to add [Solved] to the subject line.
I am sorry if this is obvious but could someone explain to me how to do this. I have yet to figure it out. :oops:
I’m probably the last person on earth you should get lessons on etiquette from but I think I can answer you question.

This is my OP (original post). When the thread reaches a successful conclusion and I’m satisfied that the problem is resolved I return to the first post and edit the subject line (aka title) and add: [SOLVED] to it.

To edit a post: Login, find your post and then press the Edit button at the top right corner of that post. Make your changes and then press Submit just as you did when first you made the post.

User avatar
sinc
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed 22 Jul 2009, 20:35
Location: Tampa, FL USA

#50 Post by sinc »

OOOHHHHH!!! Just simply edit the subject of the first message. Thank you puppyite. Man I couldn't figure that out.

Boy I feel smarter already. :D

SickPuppy
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun 17 Jan 2010, 15:31

Re: Forum ettiquette

#51 Post by SickPuppy »

Nathan F wrote:We need as many people to adopt this puppy as possible, so don't drive someone back to the evil empire that is MS.
I'll do my part by making a competing evil empire. :twisted:

jonyo

#52 Post by jonyo »

wow ..4 pages :roll: starting in Jul 08, 2005 with the last comments
Jan 19, 2010
Oct 15, 2009
perhaps an update is in order not to mention it is hard to find

Bruce B

#53 Post by Bruce B »

jonyo wrote:wow ..4 pages :roll: starting in Jul 08, 2005 with the last comments
Jan 19, 2010
Oct 15, 2009
perhaps an update is in order not to mention it is hard to find
A bit nostalgic for me. In reading back, I'm surprised at how much I've
learned. About four years ago I thought they were called lickable clinks.

No. That wasn't correct. They are more technically called clickable links

~

User avatar
bigpup
Posts: 13886
Joined: Sun 11 Oct 2009, 18:15
Location: S.C. USA

#54 Post by bigpup »

Adding attachments to topic/posts in forum.
Guide to follow:

Images:
To be visible in post or topic-
No wider than 600
No higher than is absolutely needed to see image in a usable way.
Height really depends on type of image.
Quality as low as usable. A very low setting will still give useful image.

File size:
0 to 1MB
Common sense dictates that you should try to limit an attached file to less than 1MB. The smaller the better.
This data is stored on a forum server and the forum has to pay for the storage used. In general the forum probably has an allocated amount of data storage space, that has been paid for, but if it needs more, there is an added cost.
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected :shock:
YaPI(any iso installer)

Post Reply