EATHER STUNT PRODUCTS

For those interested in Brian Eather's range of Props, Tanks and Tuned Pipes, his latest catalogue of products is now listed on the VicStunt website - http://www.vicstunt.com

Brian doesn't see the need for his own site, and the page previously dedicated to his products on the Ozstunt site is now two years out of date and is best ignored. The range of products is constantly changing, with items no longer required being replaced with the latest being asked for. From this time on, new items will be marked as new, and items no longer available will be deleted from the list.

Due to the fluctuating exchange rate, prices are available on contact with him via snailmail, email or phone.

Sorry, Len, if you think this should be in the classified section. Posted here so the maximum number will see it.

>Sorry, Len, if you think this should be in the classified
>section. Posted here so the maximum number will see it.
>
>

This is fine. You are not selling an individual product, nor are you marketing the marketer, either. It is more for information. I would not want everyone posting everyone's site, here, however, for eventually it would become a marketing site.

As for the classified section, it is there for individuals to post one of a kind items that they are wishing to sell for a price, a way to dispose of some of the "extra" stuff we have, while also benefiting others, although I have allowed the small garage type operators to post limited production items of interest to the group. Here, too, I do not want it to be used as a billboard for something they are selling elsewhere, as on e-bay.

If I can make one more comment, and I am sorry if this is brutal, kill the animations! These are all cute, nifty, whatever, but for a person on dial up service they are horrible! I tried to get on just to look at the Eather products and I could not even go there. It was hung up on the animations. Frankly, I tried twice and gave up. this is one of the reasons I have kept my site so very simple. At least people can get on.

LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-04 AT 09:38 AM (CDT)
 
No problem, Len - that's not a brutal comment at all. I am always acutely conscious of keeping everything within the range of dialups. Those animations though are Flash files and not animated gif files. The largest is only 32K which is not any real problem for a dialup, and certainly not cause for your system hanging.

I don't mean this to be brutal either, but perhaps you might look at your system resources? I've asked many others on dialups for their display times and to date you are the first whom I'm aware of to experience any difficulty.

For your purpose, try this: http://www.vicstunt.com/Eather/Eather.htm .. that it Brian's section but "it" (at 2:15am I'm tired) displays without the VS navigation - his pages only.

LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-04 AT 10:09 AM (CDT)
 
>No problem, Len - that's not a brutal comment at all. I am
>always acutely conscious of keeping everything within the
>range of dialups. Those animations though are Flash files
>and not animated gif files. The largest is only 32K which is
>not any real problem for a dialup, and certainly not cause
>for your system hanging.
>
>I don't mean this to be brutal either, but perhaps you might
>look at your system resources? I've asked many others on
>dialups for their display times and to date you are the
>first whom I'm aware of to experience any difficulty.

It loaded plenty quick enough for me - once I used Netscape! If it took a long time to load, I would say the problem is on the receive end.

However, one big problem I did find - it doesn't function at all in Safari! I get the window header, but the rest is just a blank white frame. There is a pop-up window, and that may be affecting it. but Netscape 7.1 had no problem blocking the pop-up but allowing the page to load normally.

Might there be some hook that only loads the page for certain borwsers that "are compliant"? If the list is exclusionary ("only these browsers work") instead of inclusionary ("these browsers won't work") I would imagine that it's only looking for only IE and Netscape/Mozilla, and you need to add the other popular browsers (Safari, Opera, iCab) as these are at least as "compliant" as anything else. If it's not that, then I am at a loss to understand it.

I may try faking the browser ID and trying again - but not until tonight.

Brett

P.S. - in viewing the source, I note that it redirected to a page that is supposed to display:
<p>This page uses frames, but your browser doesn't support them.</p>

This very strongly suggests that there is some problem with filtering the browser ID - because Safari has no problem with frames.

> It loaded plenty quick enough for me - once I used
>Netscape! If it took a long time to load, I would say the
>problem is on the receive end.
>
> However, one big problem I did find - it doesn't function
>at all in Safari! I get the window header, but the rest is
>just a blank white frame. There is a pop-up window, and that
>may be affecting it. but Netscape 7.1 had no problem
>blocking the pop-up but allowing the page to load normally.

I am using Internet Explorer and Windows XP. It could be that the pop up is part of the problem, too??? I don't know. But I normally don't have problems with web sites and find this one to load very quickly, even in expanded mode. However, when on your site, it just stopped dead for me. And it is similar to what Brett described above. I got the header, but a blank white frame that never loaded beyond that while at the bottom there was the animation going on.

On the Flitelines site they used to have banner advertising that loaded slowly with its animation and caused me to just quit going over there. If I had to click off a banner each time just to load a page, it wasn't worth it. That was why I was thinking the animation might be the problem here.

>
>> It loaded plenty quick enough for me - once I used
>>Netscape! If it took a long time to load, I would say the
>>problem is on the receive end.
>>
>> However, one big problem I did find - it doesn't function
>>at all in Safari! I get the window header, but the rest is
>>just a blank white frame. There is a pop-up window, and that
>>may be affecting it. but Netscape 7.1 had no problem
>>blocking the pop-up but allowing the page to load normally.
>
>I am using Internet Explorer and Windows XP. It could be
>that the pop up is part of the problem, too??? I don't
>know. But I normally don't have problems with web sites and
>find this one to load very quickly, even in expanded mode.
>However, when on your site, it just stopped dead for me.
>And it is similar to what Brett described above. I got the
>header, but a blank white frame that never loaded beyond
>that while at the bottom there was the animation going on.
>

Leonard, do "view page source", and see if you get the same redirect page that has the string I posted above on it. Bet anything it does.

I can see how Safari might be missed - but I find it hard to see why it would be filter IE. I would guess that it senses the browser type with a very exclusionary list - like "IE 5.0, and Netscape 7.0 and 7.1" exclusively. This is a pretty minor problem to fix, and there's a lot of neat stuff on the site, so it would be nice to fix it for general use.

> Leonard, do "view page source", and see if you get the
>same redirect page that has the string I posted above on it.
>Bet anything it does.
>
> I can see how Safari might be missed - but I find it
>hard to see why it would be filter IE. I would guess that it
>senses the browser type with a very exclusionary list - like
>"IE 5.0, and Netscape 7.0 and 7.1" exclusively. This is a
>pretty minor problem to fix, and there's a lot of neat stuff
>on the site, so it would be nice to fix it for general use.
>
> Brett

I used Ken's direct link and then the page loaded fine. Now that it is in my cache, I can go back to the original home page and bring the Eather page up in the window. Strange that it wouldn't load earlier, however, where all I got was the white window of death.

Len

I'm using IE and Widows XP and had no problems.

Brett,
That is strange because (I think) Safari is working for me. Unless I am missing something which I don't even realize. I was able to navigate from the home page to Brian Eather's page. The only thing I couldn't see were prices, but I am not sure whether they were really there. I do block pop-ups.

I didn't do an extensive check on all the pages.

Oh Dear!

Another thread that's gone way, way off track.

You're right, Alan. Brian does not want to publish prices on web pages due to the constantly changing exchange rates. It takes only an email to enquire.

Brett? - The line you pasted is NOT a redirection of anything; nothing to do with redirections; despite your intent to make something meaningful from it. Perhaps you're just being anecdotal again. It is simply the message displayed if you access the page with a non-frame-capable browser. I doubt if anyone today is using one, but old habits die hard.

The entire site resides within a series of nested frameset pages. Simple, and effective. Why? - to prevent, or make very difficult, those idiot webmasters out there from putting links on their site to individual or specific section pages rather than the site's first page. If they make the effort to discover an actual direct url, that page displays without the site navigation anyway. Absolutely NONE of that interferes with ANY frame-capable browser. Neither does the initial popup, which is simply a text message to my local people anyway. There is a valid time and place for popups, and denying them globally is, in my view, a little short-sighted. A plug-in Popup Killer is a better solution to the annoying adverts. You see them once, add them to the list, then never again.

In short, Brett, this is another occasion, a little like FAI Team Race, where you clearly don't know what you're talking about. As for popular browsers? - Let's look at some figures. The last Cnet guestimate I saw for websites was just over 600 million; both commercial and private. The guestimate for Internet Users world-wide hit the Two BILLION mark. One percent of one percent of that number is 200,000 (mental arithmatic: hope that's right)- and I can assure you, that is many more than the number of users of your "popular" browsers. On a percentage basis, there are more people flying F2C in the world of aeromodelling! Has Webster's re-defined the meaning of the word "popular" when we weren't looking? I'm no great lover of anything Microsoft, but when you're doing anything at all, you do it to suit the majority, and in this case the majority is HUGE! If you're having problems with your exotic browser, ask them rather than expect web designers to accomodate you.

Lastly, Brett, don't argue with me on this one. I won't tell you how to be a rocket scientist, and you don't tell me how to be a 40 years service schoolteacher, with 25 of them in the specialist areas of Computing and Information Technology.

Len? - I have no ready answer to the problem you encountered, other than it "sounds" like either your system resources at that time were very low, or your connection slowed briefly to a snail's pace. I have to repeat - there is absolutely nothing on the site that could ever cause a system freeze. You mentioned that you could see the Flash animation, so that wasn't any problem. If you have a javascript problem, then you won't like the new Pampa site one bit. The popup couldn't cause your symptoms. I'm at a loss without detailed info, and it's not worth the bother now anyway. On a 10 scale of complex websites, VS and Stuka are around the 1 mark while the new Pampa is up there at the top. As a general rule, IE will occasionally stuff up and is corrected only by a system reboot. Blame dear Billy Boy for using a lousy system of memory address allocation tables. A MAC OS absolutely kills WinBlows! I'm using W2K Advanced Server only out of necessity.

At time of writing this, 174 people have accessed Brian's set of pages. Without any finite evidence to the contrary, I'm happy that all is well with them.

(Snip)
>Len? - I have no ready answer to the problem you
>encountered, other than it "sounds" like either your system
>resources at that time were very low, or your connection
>slowed briefly to a snail's pace. I have to repeat - there
>is absolutely nothing on the site that could ever cause a
>system freeze. You mentioned that you could see the Flash
>animation, so that wasn't any problem. If you have a
>javascript problem, then you won't like the new Pampa site
>one bit. The popup couldn't cause your symptoms. I'm at a
>loss without detailed info, and it's not worth the bother
>now anyway. On a 10 scale of complex websites, VS and Stuka
>are around the 1 mark while the new Pampa is up there at the
>top. As a general rule, IE will occasionally stuff up and is
>corrected only by a system reboot. Blame dear Billy Boy for
>using a lousy system of memory address allocation tables. A
>MAC OS absolutely kills WinBlows! I'm using W2K Advanced
>Server only out of necessity.
>
>At time of writing this, 174 people have accessed Brian's
>set of pages. Without any finite evidence to the contrary,
>I'm happy that all is well with them.

Well, I was blaming the animation and I am sorry if that was a wrong assumption. One other possibility might be that after you posted the site here that a number of people were trying to access it at one time and maybe exceeded a prescribed limit set on the server? Sometimes when traffic gets too heavy on a site that stops it. Might be, might be.

>
>The entire site resides within a series of nested frameset
>pages. Simple, and effective. Why? - to prevent, or make
>very difficult, those idiot webmasters out there from
>putting links on their site to individual or specific
>section pages rather than the site's first page.

This type of site has one disadvantage in my opinion. You can't easily post a direct link to specific
information on the site. You are forced to explain how to navigate to the information. You also can't
bookmark the pages you are interested in seeing in the future.

This was clearly a design decision on your part, and it is your site.

As far as browsers, I still use Netscape 4.79. Why? It is much faster than Mozilla, and I won't use
IE/Outlook because it is basically (IMO) unsafe. Way too many viruses use Outlook to propagate.

Perhaps I "should" upgrade, but then I still like the way my Fox.35 runs too.

If a site won't work and I really want to access it, I just use Mozilla. If that won't work then IE.
Your site worked reasonably well in 4.79, except I couldn't put my pin on the map (tells me to
upgrade), and the lower row of menu items across the top was mostly obscured, but still could be
selected.

>In short, Brett, this is another occasion, a little like FAI
>Team Race, where you clearly don't know what you're talking
>about.
I think all Brett wanted was that the site not tell him not to use his browser of choice. Some sites
just advise you that you may have problems, recommend you upgrade, and let you decide if you
want to proceed.

LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-04 AT 11:06 PM (CDT)
 
>Oh Dear!
>
>Another thread that's gone way, way off track.
>
>You're right, Alan. Brian does not want to publish prices on
>web pages due to the constantly changing exchange rates. It
>takes only an email to enquire.
>
>Brett? - The line you pasted is NOT a redirection of
>anything; nothing to do with redirections; despite your
>intent to make something meaningful from it. Perhaps you're
>just being anecdotal again. It is simply the message
>displayed if you access the page with a non-frame-capable
>browser. I doubt if anyone today is using one, but old
>habits die hard.
>
>The entire site resides within a series of nested frameset
>pages. Simple, and effective. Why? - to prevent, or make
>very difficult, those idiot webmasters out there from
>putting links on their site to individual or specific
>section pages rather than the site's first page. If they
>make the effort to discover an actual direct url, that page
>displays without the site navigation anyway. Absolutely NONE
>of that interferes with ANY frame-capable browser. Neither
>does the initial popup, which is simply a text message to my
>local people anyway. There is a valid time and place for
>popups, and denying them globally is, in my view, a little
>short-sighted. A plug-in Popup Killer is a better solution
>to the annoying adverts. You see them once, add them to the
>list, then never again.
>
>In short, Brett, this is another occasion, a little like FAI
>Team Race, where you clearly don't know what you're talking
>about. As for popular browsers? - Let's look at some
>figures. The last Cnet guestimate I saw for websites was
>just over 600 million; both commercial and private. The
>guestimate for Internet Users world-wide hit the Two BILLION
>mark. One percent of one percent of that number is 200,000
>(mental arithmatic: hope that's right)- and I can assure
>you, that is many more than the number of users of your
>"popular" browsers. On a percentage basis, there are more
>people flying F2C in the world of aeromodelling! Has
>Webster's re-defined the meaning of the word "popular" when
>we weren't looking? I'm no great lover of anything
>Microsoft, but when you're doing anything at all, you do it
>to suit the majority, and in this case the majority is HUGE!
>If you're having problems with your exotic browser, ask them
>rather than expect web designers to accomodate you.
>
>Lastly, Brett, don't argue with me on this one. I won't tell
>you how to be a rocket scientist, and you don't tell me how
>to be a 40 years service schoolteacher, with 25 of them in
>the specialist areas of Computing and Information
>Technology.

There's the page source:

**********************

...../head.....
.....frameset rows="1,*" framespacing="0" border="0" frameborder="0".....
.....frame name="upper" scrolling="no" noresize target="lower" src="Lead/index2a.htm".....
.....frame name="lower" src="Lead/index2.htm" target="lower" scrolling="auto".....
.....noframes..... .....body.....
.....p.....This page uses frames, but your browser doesn't support them....../p.....
...../body..... ...../noframes..... ...../frameset.....
...../html.....

**********************

Which certainly appears as if it is redirecting me from the real site, to an error message erroneously indicating I am not using a frames-compliant browser. Safari 1.0 rel 85 is perfectly able to display frames, and is among the most standards-compliant browsers available, hence I conclude that there's some problem on the web site end where the site is incorrectly characterizing the browser.

You have a problem, and I guess if you don't care to fix it, that's up to you.

As for the rest - We had a disagreement in the past. I have been civil to you. I expect the same in return.
Brett

LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-04 AT 11:41 PM (CDT)
 
>
> Which certainly appears as if it is redirecting
>me from the real site, to an error message erroneously
>indicating I am not using a frames-compliant browser. Safari
>1.0 rel 85 is perfectly able to display frames, and is among
>the most standards-compliant browsers available, hence I
>conclude that there's some problem on the web site end where
>the site is incorrectly characterizing the browser.
>
> You have a problem, and I guess if you don't care to fix
>it, that's up to you.

For information's sake, when I change my user-agent string to emulate MSIE 5.22 (but still ran the Safari 1.0 v85 code), hey, whaddya know, pages render fine!

Guess in my abject ignorance, I randomly enabled the debug menu, accidentally changed my user-agent at random, and managed to stumble by pure chance on the cause.

It's my uninformed, brownian-motion guess that if the site was set to accept:

Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/85 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/85

as a valid user-agent string, the original problem would go away, least for Safari 1.0 users.

KenD, since you are an authority on such American matters as the US F2C scene and my homeboys' software, perhaps you can tell me how to get onto I-5 south from downtown Seattle.

I have Exploder, Safari amd Netscape.

The two fit have a lot of bugs,

Netsacpe takes ogr toload, but it's by far the best obe!

Ion

I am uising 256 broadband.

>For those interested in Brian Eather's range of Props, Tanks
>and Tuned Pipes, his latest catalogue of products is now
>listed on the VicStunt website - http://www.vicstunt.com
>
>Brian doesn't see the need for his own site, and the page
>previously dedicated to his products on the Ozstunt site is
>now two years out of date and is best ignored. The range of
>products is constantly changing, with items no longer
>required being replaced with the latest being asked for.
>From this time on, new items will be marked as new, and
>items no longer available will be deleted from the list.
>
>Due to the fluctuating exchange rate, prices are available
>on contact with him via snailmail, email or phone.
>

Now that we got the other stuff out of our system...

I can unabashedly recommend Brian Eather's products. I've been very happy with the craftsmanship and performance of the props I have used. You just take them out of the box and put them on the airplane - no balancing, no filing, look like works of art. They also hold their pitch in hot weather.

I (taking the lead from Ted and David) have had great luck with the 12-3.75 "red" UCT 3-blade and the 12.5-3.75 "green" flat-back 3-blade on the PA and RO-Jett61s. My standard setup for the PA uses an 11.5-3.7 "red" UCT 3-blade. Doesn't sound like much prop for a 61, but it pulls the plane with GREAT AUTHORITY, and is at the same time exceptionally light and thus does not disturb the yaw trim.

The other beauty thing is the price - as Ken mentions, the exchange rate varies, but it's been pretty favorable for US$, and in any case they are bargains.

I simply can't overstate the point - simply one of the finest stunt products on offer anywhere, and given that we are really blessesd with the availablility of numerous high-quality engines, props. pipes from several sources, that's saying something.

>
> Now that we got the other stuff out of our system...
>
> I can unabashedly recommend Brian Eather's products.
>I've been very happy with the craftsmanship and performance
>of the props I have used. You just take them out of the box
>and put them on the airplane - no balancing, no filing, look
>like works of art. They also hold their pitch in hot
>weather.
>
> I (taking the lead from Ted and David) have had great
>luck with the 12-3.75 "red" UCT 3-blade and the 12.5-3.75
>"green" flat-back 3-blade on the PA and RO-Jett61s. My
>standard setup for the PA uses an 11.5-3.7 "red" UCT
>3-blade. Doesn't sound like much prop for a 61, but it pulls
>the plane with GREAT AUTHORITY, and is at the same time
>exceptionally light and thus does not disturb the yaw trim.
>
> The other beauty thing is the price - as Ken mentions,
>the exchange rate varies, but it's been pretty favorable for
>US$, and in any case they are bargains.
>
> I simply can't overstate the point - simply one of the
>finest stunt products on offer anywhere, and given that we
>are really blessesd with the availablility of numerous
>high-quality engines, props. pipes from several sources,
>that's saying something.
>
> Brett

For what it's worth, Brett's comments get a great big ditto from me. I had the great pleasure of working with Brian in a minor fashion on the early development of his original props and he has taken the result of that collaboration to a level several rungs further up the ladder. Not only do the props perform beautifully, they look just as good right out of the Pizza box they come in (Windy would love 'em)

The same is true of his outstanding tuned pipes. The earliest versions were part of a development program that was (to the best of my knowledge) unique in its approach. Utilizing take apart technology to experiment with variable expansion chamber volumes, baffles and noise control. His latest pipes are at least the equal or better I've run.

Please don't take this as an indictment of any of the other excellent products we are fortunate to have available to us in this second golden age of the event. It is merely a statement of what I personally have experienced in working closely with Brian ... to my competitive well being. Along with the offerings of Randy and Richard, we've never had it better.

Having said that, my congratulations to Brett for his forebearance and civility in response to clearly outrageous provocation.

>Please don't take this as an indictment of any of the other
>excellent products we are fortunate to have available to us
>in this second golden age of the event.

Well, good point. I am frequently dismayed that positive mention of one item/product/approach is interpreted as a slight of some other, similar, item/product/approach. Anything I make a point of recommending is recommended because I have good experience with it - not because of the source or because of some other emotional connection to it! This appears to be a recurring theme in stunt - examples are all to common and obvious.

There's lots of things you could buy, and will work. Eather products are among them.

> There's lots of things you could buy, and will work.
>Eather products are among them.
>
>Brett

Brian Eather rules!!! 'Nough said...
Brad

Now wait a minute! This thread is in serious danger of just slithering off into the jungle of archived material where few of us bother to go.

KenD (probably his real name) and Brett Buck (most obviously a made-up name of some sort) had an interesting discussion going.

Who was right on the issues mentioned?

>Now wait a minute! This thread is in serious danger of just
>slithering off into the jungle of archived material where
>few of us bother to go.
>
>KenD (probably his real name) and Brett Buck (most obviously
>a made-up name of some sort) had an interesting discussion
>going.
>
>Who was right on the issues mentioned?
>
>Dan

It kind of makes you wonder how many other school teachers have met a similar fate.

>>Who was right on the issues mentioned?
>>
>>Dan
>
>
>It kind of makes you wonder how many other school teachers
>have met a similar fate.

No offense, guys, but I just don't think this is called for. Ken had a point, in that I did distract from his initial message about Brian Eather's product listing. He obviously doesn't care for me - and he's not alone, I'm sure. and maybe that influenced the rest of it. We said our respective pieces, and I'd just as soon move on, if it's all the same to you. There's nothing to be gained by belaboring it.

OK !

I had resolved that to continue in this thread was futile, but ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Brett is WRONG! Not just in his assumption that it was the site causing his problem, but also in his belief that he has the right to tell others they are wrong when he doesn't know the "facts" himself.

When he cannot recognise the simplest and most basic of html frameset pages, then he is simply soap-boxing, and insulting me in the process. The source code he pasted is what is seen by EVERYONE if they select View Source.

The code he pasted is the equivalent of a simple IF .. THEN statement - IF the user's browser recognises frame command, then it goes ahead and displays the relevant pages in frames of the stated dimensions. If not, THEN it displays the message included in the particular line he quoted. There is NOT any redirection whatsoever. It does NOT redirect to another page to display that message.

If he received that message, then the problem is HIS and not mine or anyone elses. From what I gathered, he did not receive it anyway. He encountered what was probably congestion on the Internet, or something totally un-related to the site itself. End of free lesson in html coding!

Next point? - His browser. He "believes" that it is the website designer who controls or permits certain browsers according to their ID string. WRONG! - in the general sense. It is the Server that may, if made to do so, dictate that a specific browser or specific settings within that browser are required for access to it. A website administrator MAY exert some control if he wishes, and then only with the consent of the Server owner. But WHY would one? Just to make life difficult for Brett Buck? My site is running on an Apache Server, as are 95% of the world's websites. There is absolutely nothing in the Server's Command structure that creates problems with his browser. If Brett encounters problems, then he may be better off not playing with it, or better still by recognising instances for what they are rather than immediately finding a scapegoat for his own errors of assessment.

Ted? - I'll become anecdotal here, and quote Special Agent Starling - "Turn that high-powered perception on yourself, and ask what has become of your objectivity?" Brett can say anything he likes, even erronous statements of supposed fact, to people - yet when someone answers him, suddenly that someone is the bad guy. I am the Respondent to Brett's supercilious attitude, when his ramblings have no factual basis whatsoever. How does that make me the Provocateur? So much for Brett's version of "being civil".

What right does HE have to state "You have a problem, and I guess if you don't care to fix it, that's up to you." The fact it is not a problem, and not a fault in the website, is incidental. Yet I am provoking him? He claims to know everything about everything - He knows virtually nothing about the subject in question - Who has a problem?

JJ? - You're showing a similar attitude with your sarcasm. Is this just a "Brett is always right" thing? - or is it because a non-American has the temerity to tell him he is wrong.

I've said my piece.

Len? - Would you remove my registration please? When having a place in here requires this level of tolerance, and the acceptance of Ivory Tower personalities justifying personal insults, then it's not worth the time, effort or bandwidth.

>Ted? - I'll become anecdotal here, and quote Special Agent
>Starling - "Turn that high-powered perception on yourself,
>and ask what has become of your objectivity?" Brett can say
>anything he likes, even erronous statements of supposed
>fact, to people - yet when someone answers him, suddenly
>that someone is the bad guy. I am the Respondent to Brett's
>supercilious attitude, when his ramblings have no factual
>basis whatsoever. How does that make me the Provocateur? So
>much for Brett's version of "being civil".

<<<Robby the robot, arms flailing about>>>>

"DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!! DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!!"

(that's a joke...)

>What right does HE have to state "You have a problem, and I
>guess if you don't care to fix it, that's up to you." The
>fact it is not a problem, and not a fault in the website, is
>incidental. Yet I am provoking him? He claims to know
>everything about everything - He knows virtually nothing
>about the subject in question - Who has a problem?

I it is probably not a good idea to always assume you are the enlightened one in a conversation. It is very possible you will meet someone who actually is, and then you will be found out.

I like all the web talk. I must admit, being a webmaster myself I don't understand why someone would discuss freeware browser compatibility issues when 98% of the world uses IE. It's like programming TV for black and white because I have one in the garage... I have received e-mails in the past that said similar, I sent them to the trash bin.

LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-04 AT 11:37 AM (CDT)
 
> I must admit, being a webmaster
>myself I don't understand why someone would discuss freeware
>browser compatibility issues when 98% of the world uses IE.
>It's like programming TV for black and white because I have
>one in the garage... I have received e-mails in the past
>that said similar, I sent them to the trash bin.

All these people selling things that don't listen to
people _trying hard_ to buy their stuff?
I wouldn't think about the world's usage of IE;
I would think about my (potential) customers.
Brett's one; Larry's another; I'm another.
There's 3 people using something besides IE.
A few more of us, and we'll start to be a sizable percentage.
Or not.

>All these people selling things that don't listen to
>people _trying hard_ to buy their stuff?
>I wouldn't think about the world's usage of IE;
>I would think about my (potential) customers.
>Brett's one; Larry's another; I'm another.
>There's 3 people using something besides IE.
>A few more of us, and we'll start to be a sizable
>percentage.
>Or not.

I frankly don't KNOW how to fix all these compatibility issues.

Somehow I manage to survive.

>I frankly don't KNOW how to fix all these compatibility
>issues.

If a judge criticized your wingovers, would you ignore
the feedback or talk to your coach?

Enlist the help of someone who knows.
Study. Pretend it's important, like stunt

>>I frankly don't KNOW how to fix all these compatibility
>>issues.
>
>If a judge criticized your wingovers, would you ignore
>the feedback or talk to your coach?

Depends on who said it I suppose.

I understand what you are saying.

I do web as a part time thing for no money. I get my laser cutting for free that is about it (and Steve and John's undying love of course)

I think the guy who did Brian's site was just doing it as a favor to Brian. No one made a bunch of cash off the deal.

>>>I frankly don't KNOW how to fix all these compatibility
>>>issues.
>>
>>If a judge criticized your wingovers, would you ignore
>>the feedback or talk to your coach?
>
>Depends on who said it I suppose.
>
>I understand what you are saying.
>
>I do web as a part time thing for no money. I get my laser
>cutting for free that is about it (and Steve and John's
>undying love of course)
>
>I think the guy who did Brian's site was just doing it as a
>favor to Brian. No one made a bunch of cash off the deal.

Yes, and that's fine. That's the beauty of the internet - people can and should do whatever they please. This whole thing is a minor problem (whether it's in the HTML directly, somewhere in the server, or in the local nework configuration) that's easy to work around using a well-understood and not uncommon mechanism. I mention it because Leonard had seemed to have a related problem and others might as well.

I had no intent at all to start some sort of flame war and I won't now. This is the result of items other than what went on here and I certainly don't think rehashing them will provide any benefit to anyone.

Awright! I've still "got it" when it comes civil and uncivil discussions, provoking either one.

From KenD: "JJ? - You're showing a similar attitude with your sarcasm. Is this just a 'Brett is always right' thing? - or is it because a non-American has the temerity to tell him he is wrong."

Ya know, I don't think Brett is always right. For example, he and I seem to have a minor disagreement when it comes to FAI TR. Actually, there is probably not a "right" or "wrong" side to our mutual views, and we will no doubt discuss these views next time we meet.

However, I will most emphatically tell one and all that I have *never* known Brett to be wrong on any issue of significance, whether it be Precision Aerobatics or most anything else he and I have discussed in the past.

So judging by track record, in my view Brett's is sterling in every way. Even if I can't wait to catch him in a monstrous mistake...