September 5, 2003
FUNCTIONAL ARCHIVES?
Thanks to the wisdom of AOG and the work of the Other Brother, we now have full and searchable archives, with comments. You can scroll through the archives or use the search function to the left.
We greatly appreciate the feedback everyone's been giving and welcome more.
Posted by orrinj at September 5, 2003 8:33 AMAll I have to say at this time is that I am really impressed by this new format, and wish to congratulate you on your new bloghome. This is great--keep up the good work.
Posted by: Southerner at September 5, 2003 8:55 AMAll I have to say is that while this looks great, and I'm impressed as heck at how quick y'all transitioned, and I understand why you did so, I'm upset, because now I have to retrain my fingers not to type "brothersjudd.blogspot.com" first thing every morning.
Oh, just so you don't think I'm getting all mushy:
"One reason the NFL captures our imagination for five months a year is that the game shifts so quickly -- in strategy, momentum and personal psychology. Let the man with the hot hand make one overconfident mistake in judgment and the mood on both sidelines shifts."
-Some guy named Thomas Boswell.
I love baseball; but the reason so much work goes into baseball box scores is simply this: Eighty percent of the games aren't interesting enough to occupy one's attention for the full 3-4 hours. Conversely, who cares about the box score in a football game (except baseball junkies like me?) -- the thrill is in the action, not the debate about it.
Posted by: Chris at September 5, 2003 9:12 AMWith Netscape, Chris, you don't have to type the whole URL each time.
Nevertheless, I'm baffled.
I use Netscape 4.7 at home on a PC and Netscape 4.6 at work on an iMac. Since Tim Blair moved to spleenville.com, his site at work is overprinted and the links don't work. At home, works fine.
Since brothersjuddblogspot changed, it overprints on my home browser and the comments are busted, but it works fine on the iMac.
Since I never RTM, and this seems counterintuitive, to say the least, I'm baffled.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at September 5, 2003 2:55 PMHarry: My new office has me on a Pentium I running Windows 95 and IE 5.5. I use Opera every so often, because I got a special dispensation. I'd prefer Mozilla, but that's asking a bit much.
Point is, I find it faster to type in the address than to wait for the ten year old processor to figure out what's going on and catch up. And I ain't exactly the quickest typist in the world.
On a related note, I have similar problems. On PCs, but still.
Posted by: Chris at September 5, 2003 4:03 PMI have a Windows 2000 XP running IE machine at work, and the site works fine. Same with my iMac OS X with IE.
I just stash the URL in favorites.
A couple minor gripes. I can't expand the comments window to full screen. And the "Remember Personal info" is a bit clunky. I want it to remember forever, but it seems to get oldtimers' disease at the end of each session.
Comments response time is much faster. Around lunch time on the old site, it was bog slow.
Posted by: Regards, Jeff Guinn at September 6, 2003 9:24 PMEnlarge your penis now click here: Penis Enlargement
Posted by: Penis Enlargement at December 23, 2003 3:57 PM