PDA

View Full Version : My New Blog


Chris
03-02-2006, 08:56 AM
http://www.websitepublisher.net/blog/
Westech
03-02-2006, 09:08 AM
Looks good!

I have one request: For comments, would you consider either making the email address not required or giving the option to hide it from the public?
ses5909
03-02-2006, 09:11 AM
email addresses aren't displayed by default in Wordpress AFAIK. I just posted a comment and its not visible.
Vinnie
03-02-2006, 09:22 AM
I think emails are displayed if no URL is given.
KLB
03-02-2006, 09:25 AM
Well the blog I use to promote my environmental chemistry site is new and I don't even know if anyone has ever visited it, but I bet the SE's do or will soon enough, so I went a little off topic in my blog and put a plug in for your new blog. I hope others will do the same. (nudge nudge)
Shawn
03-02-2006, 09:52 AM
Those are some small links on the left side of WebsitePublisher.

Hard to see the new blog link.
ses5909
03-02-2006, 09:58 AM
Okay Ken, i caved.

http://www.ilovecode.com/2006/03/02/new-website-publisher-blog/

I dont get serious traffic, but I get about 400 uniques a day and the site is geared towards web developers so hopefully something can come from it.
Westech
03-02-2006, 09:58 AM
Hard to see the new blog link.

And hard to click on it from the Forums section... ;)

Also, don't forget to start approving your comments!
Chris
03-02-2006, 10:03 AM
I plan on adding a tab to the top of the site for the blog, so it'll be visible from the forums and there'll be a bigger link.

As for the left menu being small... yes, it is... but this site is about the content not the design and so I kinda like the minimalistic feel.
Steelsun
03-02-2006, 10:05 AM
Guess I should put it in my blog, although I haven't blogged in over a month.

Looking good though, I'll bookmark it for my morning daily reads.
Bleys
03-02-2006, 11:09 AM
Once my vaporware-so-far RSS feed site thingy is done (*cough, cough*), I'll definitely be adding this one to my subscriptions. ;)
charmedlover
03-02-2006, 04:20 PM
Could I ask for better proofreading?
Chris
03-02-2006, 04:28 PM
Which post? I tend to type mine in Word so I don't make spelling mistakes, then I give them a once over for grammar.
charmedlover
03-02-2006, 07:54 PM
The error I saw before I posted to proofread was in the second sentence of your first post:


Actually no, thats not true, this blog will be better.

I figured that Word would catch that. OO does for me. Also, since I'm a grammar stickler you should spell out numbers as well. Last, remember to use commas when needed.
KLB
03-02-2006, 08:24 PM
Charmedlover, grammar nerd and Opera fanatic.
charmedlover
03-02-2006, 08:50 PM
Don't forget that I like Macs too. ;)

Being a grammar nerd is pretty nice. I've made my fair share of profit from doing copy (and translation) and I spend about two days a week doing copy for my website. I had (and have) good teachers for English. Of course the one I have now I tend to disagree a lot with her grammar corrections.

For example, telly is not slang (http://ethan.lowter.us/2006/02/25/telly-is-not-slang).

What I always hated was finding errors in SitePoint's blog post and articles. They have a freaking editorial staff! You at least think they could have the right spelling and no typos. It always makes me cringe. It's like seeing an error in the newspaper.
Chris
03-02-2006, 08:54 PM
I purposely write a little informal. I find it to be more approachable by the average person. I don't plan on spelling out numbers, that might work in newspaper articles but when you might be slipping bits of code into your posts it could be confusing. Plus then you have abbreviations... I'm never going to write "two point three five CPM" or something like that.

If all I missed though was an apostrophe and a comma I'm pretty happy :)
KLB
03-02-2006, 08:55 PM
I'll have to keep in mind that Charmedlover is a gramar nerd when the time comes that I need a copy editor because my wife is too busy.
charmedlover
03-02-2006, 09:20 PM
You don't spell out code, lol. That would be ridiculous. Grammar rules don't state anything about including quote, so you treat it as a quote (according to all the other grammar nuts I've discussed this with) and therefore the code is left as is.


Plus then you have abbreviations... I'm never going to write "two point three five CPM" or something like that.

My only suggestion there would be to use the acronym tag to define CPM just for clarity.

I understand that most people don't care about spelling out numbers or contractions in formal writing, or other rules that most people don't realize. I do not mind too much; however, I try to point it out so that people are aware that technically it is incorrect. As long as you don't go about using double negatives or the wrong "there" then everything is quite fine. :)

The funny thing is that I am such a grammar nut, but my spelling sucks. Luckily spell check can handle that particular part of writing quite well.
The New Guy
03-02-2006, 10:03 PM
CPM isn't even an acronym. It's an ilitialism. Take that grammar nut!
Bleys
03-02-2006, 10:25 PM
CPM isn't even an acronym. It's an ilitialism. Take that grammar nut!

That would be true, except that it's initialism, not ilitialism. :D
KLB
03-02-2006, 10:29 PM
You guys are a bunch of freaks.
charmedlover
03-03-2006, 05:27 AM
It depends. It is well debated whether to differentiate acronyms and initialisms. I'll take this from WikiPedia, which generally sums up what I would type otherwise:


Of the two words, "acronym" is the much more frequently used and known, and some dictionaries, speakers and writers use it when referring to all abbreviations formed from initial letters. However, this is a contentious point, and there are also some (including the Oxford English Dictionary) who differentiate between the two terms.
The New Guy
03-03-2006, 06:32 AM
The difference is simple, one is pronounced the other is not. I don't see why the point would be "contentious" just because people don't know about it. Thats like saying "alot" should be one word just because everyone and their brother uses it. Also, why is a grammer nut quoting wikipedia? :p
Vinnie
03-03-2006, 07:23 AM
I'll have to keep in mind that Charmedlover is a gramar nerd when the time comes that I need a copy editor because my wife is too busy.
charmedlover's list of edits for environmentalchemistry.com
1. All pages shall mention Opera in every other sentence.
2. See #1
KLB
03-03-2006, 08:05 AM
charmedlover's list of edits for environmentalchemistry.com
1. All pages shall mention Opera in every other sentence.
2. See #1

I could do an article on how energy inefficent the corporate offices were. :p
charmedlover
03-03-2006, 08:09 AM
What's wrong with WikiPedia? I spend so much time there just making grammar corrections.

However, it is not just the general populous. I've talked with a few other grammar nuts and they seem to generally agree that the difference is considered meager in most states. That's an issue of grammar that too many people refer to things differently. Still, while most people may not know grammatical terms we all have a good sense of what sounds wrong and right in our heads. It is part of aquiring a language.

(I study Linguistics and hope to major in it in the future. Language is my second life. Computers is my first.)

Generally the only lead towards Opera I make in my writing is mentioning it before any other browser (if I list them) and only linking to it. As you'll see overall the published work on my own website does not typically mention Opera:

http://www.lowter.com/search?q=opera

Although, you'll see it's mentioned a lot in the forums.
moonshield
03-04-2006, 08:10 AM
Mook-Jon joined the blog too. This is going to be an awesome blog.
Bleys
03-04-2006, 08:34 PM
Mook-Jon joined the blog too. This is going to be an awesome blog.

Agree. I can't wait for them to really get into some meaty posts. :D
stymiee
03-04-2006, 08:42 PM
Wow. I never thought Chris would have additional bloggers. His blog is gonna take off.
charmedlover
03-05-2006, 07:09 AM
This reminds me I need to add it to my RSS list (Opera). :p
Young Twig
03-05-2006, 12:15 PM
What's wrong with WikiPedia? I spend so much time there just making grammar corrections.
Wikipedia is kind of gay.


http://www.lowter.com/search?q=opera
Nice navigation. :rolleyes:
The New Guy
03-05-2006, 01:00 PM
Nice navigation. :rolleyes:

Sitepoint with a palette change. :p
Young Twig
03-05-2006, 01:47 PM
Nah, that's harsh. Books changed to Applications, and the little end things are gone, too. ;)
FPU
03-05-2006, 06:27 PM
After reading your material on vBulletin management, I am gaining a lot of respect for your views in a hurry Chris, I am sure that the blog will be a smash hit too!

Thanks for some great technical information, all the best to you in the future, you have my support! :o
charmedlover
03-05-2006, 06:29 PM
Yes our tabs resemble SitePoint's, but that's it. We have an updated layout in the works with much nicer tabs. I'm actually the one working out the kinks in it.