> let's just agree to let mayority rule and accept the result.
You can see from the poll that it's 11 to have no color or limited color and 7 to have full color. However, 18 people surely isn't an accurate sampling of 164,000 members.
You are right they are not an accurate sampling, but they are the ones that care. :).
A statement which comes from somebody who hasn't posted outside the coffee house in three months.
I must say Rashakil, this comment is not very helpful. I am sorry to tell you.
Yeah, rashkil, that was a bit harsh
If it's harsh then that means it's right.
> 11 to have no color or limited color and 7 to have full color
We're now 13 for no / limited color and no new votes for full color, so it's not even me saying "even though the hardgroup core of forum regulars all want color, I think I'm doing what's best for the huge community." Of the forum regulars, the vote is still against full use of colors.
> 11 to have no color or limited color and 7 to have full color
We're now 13 for no / limited color and no new votes for full color, so it's not even me saying "even though the hardgroup core of forum regulars all want color, I think I'm doing what's best for the huge community." Of the forum regulars, the vote is still against full use of colors.
How long are you going to let the poll run?
Here's the scoop about the whole "not changing" thing ... I was never a fan of color and we never had color. Sometime last year, Dave Sinkula and some other members said that color was very important to them, and convinced me to enable it (not realizing what I was getting myself into).
Understood. I haven't been around here for that long, but I do recall one of Dave Sinkula's threads that was talking about "no color anymore", so I assumed that he was protesting to a recent change at that time.
My goal here was to force people to use color only as a tool to point good (green) and bad (red) things out, without color being thought of as a decorative font feature.
I'm a little confused about this, still. I've seen lots and lots of posts that have been colored entire green and entire red (among other colors). Why will removing colors help this?
Anyways, the point I wanted to make in this post is it is not as if we've had color enabled for the past four years and suddenly I want to get rid of it. The truth is that we haven't had any color for three years, then I was convinced to give it a shot, I agreed to, I gave it a real chance for a full year, but my opinion of it has just gotten worse by the day.
Right. I'm not exactly mad at the fact that I don't have a full color palette, but that I don't have any softer colors for "de-emphasizing" something when I do happen to color something in my post, and that limiting the selection of colors to just 2 doesn't seem to make very much sense.
Sometime last year, Dave Sinkula and some other members said that color was very important to them, and convinced me to enable it (not realizing what I was getting myself into).
I call bullshit.
> Then turn back. I'm leaving now.
I am surprised Dave that an old timer like you, who must be definitely having his share of posts of forums which didn't even have code tags, be so attached to colors. I have seen the best of your posts not rely on some coloring to deliver its value, so I guess there is much more than it meets the eye.
Then I guess you haven't seen them when the were colored.
A statement which comes from somebody who hasn't posted outside the coffee house in three months.
Because what I post elsewhere on the site continually changes.
---
My snippets, at least one now completely uncompilable; my tutorial: parts removed that -- well, they were nothing bad.
What about the stuff that I posted that used to use Courier New or FixedSys or font size for emphasis? That emphasis is lost.
What about the stuff that I posted using blue=good, magenta=bad. Now lost.
Don't try to find an answer in anything I've posted using a search, it has changed and is now quite possibly useless.
Entertain yourselves with anything other than plain text and Dani may come along later and retroactively nullify it.
If I can't read what I post (which was my complaint with the green-on-white or syntax-highlighted code), and what I write will not be what I wrote, why post, search, or follow a thread (which I had a hard time doing with the change in date/time representation)?
All-in-all, it used to be easy here and now it's a lot of work.
And as I'm trying to tie up loose ends, I greatly tend not to vote in my own polls; and I have not voted in this poll (which I viewed as a bit of an attack against my simple preference question).
---
And viewing the site from an ultra-portable device really sucks.
My snippets, at least one now completely uncompilable; my tutorial: parts removed that -- well, they were nothing bad.
Don't tell me that. I haven't checked them for sometime. But your snippets helped me a lot in the beginning. I used to consult them almost every day until I finally understood, if they are in an uncopilable state, I think that is a great lost.
> I call bullshit.
From the Sept '06 thread: "I fought for and again miss the lack of being able to highlight what I would like to point out using color." We had no color, you fought for color. I didn't like it, and shortly after removed it. You fought again. It went back a few days later. Like I said.
Dave, it's silly to make concessions for just you when, as you just admitted, you aren't happy here anyway. What would I get from giving into you? I would be unhappy with rainbow posts everywhere, and you wouldn't be posting anyways.
> I call bullshit.
From the Sept '06 thread: "I fought for and again miss the lack of being able to highlight what I would like to point out using color." We had no color, you fought for color. I didn't like it, and shortly after removed it. You fought again. It went back a few days later. Like I said.
More bullshit.
Obviously I was complaining about something that was inherent and subsequently removed. If I could only navigate this site in the default fashion of other vB sites, or had you used your own amendments to quote the proper text, I might have found it after much searching.
After realizing what I inadvertently did, I did a search of the database for all posts that use bbcode, thinking it wouldn't be very many since I never publicized anywhere that that bbcode exists.
That still strikes me as humorous.
After dozens of PMs telling you this for years, this now strikes you a something sudden?
[edit]BTW, ignore tutorials that had previously been viewed 20k+ time. (That no longer are available.)
Tell me how a limited color palette is better.
http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/post367280.html#post367280
http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/post366658.html#post366658
Now we've got all green instead of all purple or all blue. That's good because now the posts above don't break the design or get confused with one huge link.
The only way to prevent color abuse is to ban all colors. And when they're not being abused, they don't actually interfere that much. A single purple word isn't going to break the entire design. And if having people coloring blue is a problem, ban any shades of blue that are too similar to the hyperlinks.
Actually, i've never used colors, and i've managed to survive... and it's pretty annoying reading text in various colors... it is actually a hedache (literally) reading something with too many font variations...
i'd rather read a text that uses just bold and italic text than reading underlined, colored text...
so i wouldn't mind if colors were banned at all, though it seems there are some posters that NEED colors...
Actually, i've never used colors, and i've managed to survive... and it's pretty annoying reading text in various colors... it is actually a hedache (literally) reading something with too many font variations...
i'd rather read a text that uses just bold and italic text than reading underlined, colored text...
so i wouldn't mind if colors were banned at all, though it seems there are some posters that NEED colors...
Well, now we know where that 21st vote came from.
Well, now we know where that 21st vote came from.
yup... that was me... :P
i didn't mean any harm though...:D
looks like a NO vote to colour,
well to be perfectly honest it's up to dani whether she can be bothered to add a colour system......
well to be perfectly honest it's up to dani whether she can be bothered to add a colour system......
there is colour already! the vote is because some people want to get rid of it
oh well, it is still her choice if she can be bothered to remove it!
>>the vote is because some people want to get rid of it
it's not like we want to get rid of it... it's just that we can survive with no colors... at least that's the case for me...
I made a post the other day that needed color to make sense (substitute your own values for the values in red).
The problem was that the post changed it from red to green when it actually posted.
Testing testing 1-2-3.
Were you able to edit the thread and change the font to red or could you not use red text at all? What happens when you use bbcode?
>The problem was that the post changed it from red to green when it actually posted.
I had that problem a few days ago as well. Basically you could color the text red in the WYSIWYG editor, the bbcode generated was , but when you hit "Preview Post", the text that was supposed to be red appeared as green, while the bbcode remained unchanged.
Is this reproducable?
Hm.. when I use color with any rgb code (i.e. #ff0000) it becomes green; when I use a word (i.e. red) it works fine:
RED (COLOR="#ff0000")
RED (COLOR="red")
I get that same green with any RGB code.
I don't know whether this is only in preview.. I guess I'll have to post this to find out.
On the topic of "why colors?" - I like them; if only to draw attention to a few lines in a code block. If I review a long bit of code and make changes, I color the changed parts red and embolden them, it's sometimes easier to see than if I'd JUST emboldened.
I must say though; I tend to use the 'generic' code tag rather than the language specific tags for anything more than a trivial amount of text because I find the line numbers on the syntax colored blocks throw layout. I say that, because if I used a syntax coloring code block, I probably wouldn't highlight parts with a (different) color.
Yup ... [color=red][/color] and [color=green][/color] work. Everything else defaults to green. That's by design. If you use syntax-highlighted code blocks, you CANNOT use any bbcode markup.
Here is [COLOR=red]colored[/COLOR] code.cout << [color=green]foo[/color];>Is this reproducable?
It isn't happening to me right now. But I'll let you know if it happens again.
[edit] Now I remeber what post it was. I was trying to color the semicolon red, but it ended up as green:
http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/post369965-7.html
But if you quote the post and switch out of the WYSIWYG mode, you'll notice that they are , not .
Using color=green would explain why it came out green :)
>Using color=green would explain why it came out green
Yeah, but that's not how it was when I first wrote my post. I colored it red with the WYSIWYG editor, and then it kept turning into green text. It also explains why there were 2 layers of tags, because I was trying continually to get it red, but every time I hit the "preview" button, it turned back into green.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.