I K it's obsolete, but I keep Firefox 2 around for diagnostic and comparison purposes, as when we were comparing speeds of Author Page sort with F2, 3, and 10 in e-mail.

Just noticed that AIR "Latest Entries" (Last two weeks' song posts) links weren't working on F2. Click, same page reloads.
Doesn't matter whether "Open in new tab", "Open in new window", or just direct click, opening in the same window, replacing the present page. The present page just keeps reloading.

Same occurred at another site, a threaded forum like this one, although with PHPbb. Clicking topic links or "last post" links just caused the same page to reload. Cannot reproduce on F3 or F10, so it's strictly F2. Both sites were given proper cookie and script permissions.

Of no consequence, since the browser has been out of support > 3 yrs. But since it's used for such diagnostics, if you're aware of any recent changes that would cause this, it would help me to know. If not, don't bother to go to any research. Maybe an anomaly; if it persists, I can research it; and I shouldn't be using it for anything other than test purposes, anyway. Just curious. TIA.

I K it's obsolete, but I keep Firefox 2 around for diagnostic and comparison purposes, as when we were comparing speeds of Author Page sort with F2, 3, and 10 in e-mail.

Just noticed that AIR "Latest Entries" (Last two weeks' song posts) links weren't working on F2. Click, same page reloads.
Doesn't matter whether "Open in new tab", "Open in new window", or just direct click, opening in the same window, replacing the present page. The present page just keeps reloading.

Same occurred at another site, a threaded forum like this one, although with PHPbb. Clicking topic links or "last post" links just caused the same page to reload. Cannot reproduce on F3 or F10, so it's strictly F2. Both sites were given proper cookie and script permissions.

Of no consequence, since the browser has been out of support > 3 yrs. But since it's used for such diagnostics, if you're aware of any recent changes that would cause this, it would help me to know. If not, don't bother to go to any research. Maybe an anomaly; if it persists, I can research it; and I shouldn't be using it for anything other than test purposes, anyway. Just curious. TIA.


ya got me there... I have the web developer toolbar on in the current Firefox and the page comes up with two checkmarks for standards compliance and no css errors.  there's a javascript issue though relating to adsense I think.  It might be an issue with the google stuff not loading properly.  I don't know about phpBB, but the last two weeks page is pretty simple as far as web pages are concerned.

ya got me there... I have the web developer toolbar on in the current Firefox and the page comes up with two checkmarks for standards compliance and no css errors.  there's a javascript issue though relating to adsense I think.  It might be an issue with the google stuff not loading properly.  I don't know about phpBB, but the last two weeks page is pretty simple as far as web pages are concerned.

It's getting weirder -- and intermittent stuff  is impossible to diagnose. Today, the symptom occurred when "Last two weeks' songs" was the only window/tab open. But once at a parody, all clicks worked. And once there were several tabs open, re-opened LTW: It worked in new tab, new window, same window. Go figure ... and that other forum, the PHPbb, works fine today. I suspect alien interference. >wink<

I'd noticed it occasionally before, on LTW songs, and sometimes, from home page, but intermittent also. I suppose we should expect increasing anomalies in a way-out-of-date browser that doesn't support more recent standards, and shouldn't be used other than for testing, comparison, etc. So if you DK any possible causes, please don't give it another thought.

A known AdSense js issue could account for it. Does that occur on *all* Fx, even the newest? I may look into that -- or may not. Pretty trivial in the Big Picture. Cheers.

ETA: Wow, my first Fudge ever! What an honor! ...  but I see that reasons now have to be given, which is a good thing. It shows:

Who                   Whom               What  Reason Where                     When
*Ash* (+2735/-9) Tommy Turtle (+48/-1) - : ( In topic (this one)  Today at 03:18:24 PM
specifically, http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=45656.msg2828862#msg2828862

Not that I give a rat's ***, but is : ( a valid reason? Ash, have the guts to say what you didn't like. Tech discussion too far over your head, or what? FYI, CG and I have worked on a lot of tech issues (including TT suggestion for Comment Preview, which is now an awesome reality), and will continue to do so. What's the problem?

Who                   Whom               What  Reason Where                     When
*Ash* (+2735/-9) Tommy Turtle (+48/-1) - : ( In topic (this one)  Today at 03:18:24 PM
specifically, http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=45656.msg2828862#msg2828862

Not that I give a rat's ***, but is : ( a valid reason? Ash, have the guts to say what you didn't like. Tech discussion too far over your head, or what? FYI, CG and I have worked on a lot of tech issues (including TT suggestion for Comment Preview, which is now an awesome reality), and will continue to do so. What's the problem?


My bad.  I smote you because I don't like you.

My bad.  I smote you because I don't like you.

What-ever.... If I'm supposed to be wounded by generic censure unsupported by any specific reasons, I'm afraid that you're going to be sadly disappointed.

While you're at it, would you mind Unabombing all 435 of my songs? (or have you been doing that already?) It increases the page views, which is good for ChuckyG (ads viewed), and I ignore all anon or groundless 111s anyway.  Cheers, and I hope you feel better for having vented.  :)

Whatever indeed, Tommy.  If you really didn't care, you probably wouldn't have even noticed the negative karma...I never notice when mine goes up or down, anyway.  At the very least, you wouldn't have felt the need to call Ash out about it...(not to mention childishly insulting her intelligence re: understanding your high brow techy conversation)...if you really didn't give a rat's ***, as you claim.

Not interested in getting into with you, Tommy...we've been down that road before over on the parody site...but I just had to point out that actions speak louder than words here...and your reaction TOTALLY negates your claims of indifference.

Whatever indeed, Tommy.  If you really didn't care, you probably wouldn't have even noticed the negative karma...I never notice when mine goes up or down, anyway. 
Academic curiosity -- some of us have it. And some of us are observant of a lot of things large and small, as true scientists are.

Besides, one always remembers one's "first". LOL!  ;D

What's cool is that unlike Unabombs at parodies, here you can find out who did it, and what "reason", although Ash first defaulted on the latter, then gave an irrelevant reply (personal attack).
Kind of thought that the reason for requiring reasons was so admins could vet them, and was curious about what constitutes justification.


At the very least, you wouldn't have felt the need to call Ash out about it...(not to mention childishly insulting her intelligence re: understanding your high brow techy conversation)...if you really didn't give a rat's ***, as you claim.
Emotionally, don't care. As a student of human nature, these things are interesting, sort of like dissecting a fly is interesting.


Not interested in getting into with you, Tommy...we've been down that road before over on the parody site
Ditto. Ancient history, in my book.

...but I just had to point out that actions speak louder than words here
"Actions speak more loudly than words". "Speak" is a verb, and therefore requires an adverb to modify it, not an adjective.

...and your reaction TOTALLY negates your claims of indifference.
Unabombs receive total indifference and lack of interest, because they're almost always anonymous, and no reason is given. There was info to be gained here. Being emotionally indifferent and scientifically curious are not mutually exclusive. ... and I visit this site very rarely.

It's theoretically possible that if Ash had made some specific compliant or cited some particular issue, that that could then have been evaluated, and if found to have any validity, future actions could change, an explanation given, an apology issued, etc. Unfortunately, no such info was given -- but it did give me info about Ash. (But props for using "smote" - a cool word!)

Cheers -- and sorry that you missed yourself in a group tribute posted almost exactly one year ago.

p. s. If you're going to gig this post, I most likely won't notice. The change from 0 to 1 after five years was interesting; the rest won't be. So feel free. ... btw, isn't this entire discussion OFF-TOPIC?  8)

. ... btw, isn't this entire discussion OFF-TOPIC? 

Ahem:


ETA: Wow, my first Fudge ever! What an honor! ...  but I see that reasons now have to be given, which is a good thing. It shows:

Who                   Whom               What  Reason Where                     When
*Ash* (+2735/-9) Tommy Turtle (+48/-1) - : ( In topic (this one)  Today at 03:18:24 PM
specifically, http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=45656.msg2828862#msg2828862

Not that I give a rat's ***, but is : ( a valid reason? Ash, have the guts to say what you didn't like. Tech discussion too far over your head, or what? FYI, CG and I have worked on a lot of tech issues (including TT suggestion for Comment Preview, which is now an awesome reality), and will continue to do so. What's the problem?

Academic curiosity -- some of us have it. And some of us are observant of a lot of things large and small, as true scientists are.



Are you really a scientist? 

If so, that kind of explains a lot...I mean, thumbs up for being super smart and everything...but I work in higher education, and have therefore worked with a lot of scientists, and many of them lacked appropriate social skills as well.

Are you really a scientist? 

If so, that kind of explains a lot...I mean, thumbs up for being super smart and everything...but I work in higher education, and have therefore worked with a lot of scientists, and many of them lacked appropriate social skills as well.

Not just a scientist, but a polymath and former child prodigy. Both make it difficult to acquire standard social skills, especially when by the age of six you've appeared on television and lectured in person to a Rotary Club meeting (of adults). Skipping first grade, and always being several years ahead of myself in school (i. e., several years younger than the other kids in class) didn't help, either.

Although those two linked parodies tell a lot of this humorously  (I tired to disguise one as fictional, but everyone saw through that as autobiographical, and several said they had experienced similar things while going through school), there was a serious paper on the extreme difficulties of those at the far end of the scale, posted at http://prometheussociety.org/ . Point to Articles > Favorite Articles > "The Outsiders".

Or I could upload a text copy. Well worth reading. Anyway, the main point is that while the article finds a certain range of ability (as measured on standardized tests) that is able to blend in with the rest of the world, there is a sort of cutoff beyond which those individuals don't fare so well. Suffice it to say that I'm on the "wrong" side of that cutoff.

Many times over the years I have apologized to those at AIR and here for various faux pas, as I now apologize to you and to Ash. Also, for our tiff a year or so ago. I still find some validity in my opinion, but it's still just an opinion, and there is no doubt that you are a talented parodist and writer. It's unfortunate that our paths did not cross more often on the parody pages, for whatever reasons (DKTOS, different subject matter, etc.).

And Karma for keeping an open mind, and for understanding what the title of the second linked parody said, "Life Ain't Easy With A High IQ".  8)

Not just a scientist, but a polymath and former child prodigy. Both make it difficult to acquire standard social skills, especially when by the age of six you've appeared on television and lectured in person to a Rotary Club meeting (of adults). Skipping first grade, and always being several years ahead of myself in school (i. e., several years younger than the other kids in class) didn't help, either.

Although those two linked parodies tell a lot of this humorously  (I tired to disguise one as fictional, but everyone saw through that as autobiographical, and several said they had experienced similar things while going through school), there was a serious paper on the extreme difficulties of those at the far end of the scale, posted at http://prometheussociety.org/ . Point to Articles > Favorite Articles > "The Outsiders".

Or I could upload a text copy. Well worth reading. Anyway, the main point is that while the article finds a certain range of ability (as measured on standardized tests) that is able to blend in with the rest of the world, there is a sort of cutoff beyond which those individuals don't fare so well. Suffice it to say that I'm on the "wrong" side of that cutoff.

Many times over the years I have apologized to those at AIR and here for various faux pas, as I now apologize to you and to Ash. Also, for our tiff a year or so ago. I still find some validity in my opinion, but it's still just an opinion, and there is no doubt that you are a talented parodist and writer. It's unfortunate that our paths did not cross more often on the parody pages, for whatever reasons (DKTOS, different subject matter, etc.).

And Karma for keeping an open mind, and for understanding what the title of the second linked parody said, "Life Ain't Easy With A High IQ".  8)


I'm sorry.  I don't believe you.  Someone with that high of an IQ would never have such an idiotic sig line.

I'm sorry.  I don't believe you.  Someone with that high of an IQ would never have such an idiotic sig line.

Aside from the fact that "idiotic" is a personal opinion, you're missing Arwen's point that someone with that high of an IQ wouldn't have the social compass to know what sig lines others might like or dislike.

Or you could actually try *reading* some of my parodies, and get more info on how much gray matter is behind them.
Try this one for starters, and don't skip the footnotes: http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/donmclean152.shtml

Or this one, with intro and bottom comments: http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/williamshakespearehamletlordpolonius0.shtml

Did you not read the two linked in reply to Arwen? Many readers at the autobiographical one not only didn't doubt, but empathized, because they had had similar problems with school being way beneath them.

Why do you care about my IQ, and why does it bother your?

Fudge for violating Guidelines with the personal attack of "idiotic".

I did not call you idiotic.

I called your sig line idiotic, because it is.  It's one thing if you disagree with Obama's politics, and have something relevant to say.  But this supposed IQ test is just ridiculous.  Somehow I get the feeling that anyone who takes it will automatically be smarter than Obama.  (Oh what fun!  ::) )  But if a person's IQ really is at the higher end of the scale, they most certainly wouldn't need a silly internet test to prove it, nor would they find it necessary to make sure it's automatically included in every single post.

P.S.  What are your plans to help fix the economy?

I did not call you idiotic. I called your sig line idiotic, because it is.
You have every right to dislike it, but to call something that anyone writes or posts "idiotic" is most certainly a personal attack. Ask ChuckyG or any other Admin/Moderator.
 

It's one thing if you disagree with Obama's politics, and have something relevant to say.
I've said it many times in my parodies, which you choose not to read, which is of course your right. But you have the wrong idea about that quiz.


But this supposed IQ test is just ridiculous.  Somehow I get the feeling that anyone who takes it will automatically be smarter than Obama.  (Oh what fun!  ::) )
Wrong again. Mr. O. chooses to have his school records from Harvard, etc. sealed, while everyone made fun of W's C+ average at Yale. Why does O hide his? ...

But back on topic: Trying to estimate someone's IQ from a distance is an inexact science, to be sure, especially when they have ghostwriters, speechwriters, teleprompters, etc. But if you were actually to go to that site, instead of guessing what you think it does, and then criticizing it based on your guess instead of what it actually says, (a logical fallacy known as the Straw Man argument -- look it up in Wikipedia), you'd see that the very first sentence is:
Barack Obama's IQ is 145...impressive, right?
Right, if true. That's waay above the Mensa minimum. Which blows your whole post out of the water. 98-99% of the public will not meet or exceed that.

Personally, I think you're just miffed because you took the test and didn't pass it.  :P
(Which is no shame, given the statistics above.)


P.S.  What are your plans to help fix the economy?
I don't know why I should keep posting the same links over and over. The two links in my previous post, to parodies of American Pie and Shakespeare, contain, respectively:

A detailed analysis of the economic history of the United States since its inception, including the many mistakes made in the past 100 years that got us to where we are now, and what needs to change fundamentally to get us back on track; and

A detailed analysis of the causes of the early 2000s housing boom and resultant crash in 2006, which triggered the more general recession that is still with us. You may be surprised that the chief culprits are Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Economic interference often produces short-term effects that get politicians re-elected, but the long-term effects may not show until after they leave office. Nonetheless, we're still stuck with those effects.

Fudge for judging the quiz without even looking at the site, and hence misguessing the implications, and for repeatedly criticizing in generalities while refusing to read documentation that I so helpfully tried to provide.

But it's still cool that you used "smote"!  ;D

You have every right to dislike it, but to call something that anyone writes or posts "idiotic" is most certainly a personal attack. Ask ChuckyG or any other Admin/Moderator.
  I've said it many times in my parodies, which you choose not to read, which is of course your right. But you have the wrong idea about that quiz.
Wrong again. Mr. O. chooses to have his school records from Harvard, etc. sealed, while everyone made fun of W's C+ average at Yale. Why does O hide his? ...

But back on topic: Trying to estimate someone's IQ from a distance is an inexact science, to be sure, especially when they have ghostwriters, speechwriters, teleprompters, etc. But if you were actually to go to that site, instead of guessing what you think it does, and then criticizing it based on your guess instead of what it actually says, (a logical fallacy known as the Straw Man argument -- look it up in Wikipedia), you'd see that the very first sentence is:Right, if true. That's waay above the Mensa minimum. Which blows your whole post out of the water. 98-99% of the public will not meet or exceed that.

Personally, I think you're just miffed because you took the test and didn't pass it.  :P
(Which is no shame, given the statistics above.)
I don't know why I should keep posting the same links over and over. The two links in my previous post, to parodies of American Pie and Shakespeare, contain, respectively:

A detailed analysis of the economic history of the United States since its inception, including the many mistakes made in the past 100 years that got us to where we are now, and what needs to change fundamentally to get us back on track; and

A detailed analysis of the causes of the early 2000s housing boom and resultant crash in 2006, which triggered the more general recession that is still with us. You may be surprised that the chief culprits are Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Economic interference often produces short-term effects that get politicians re-elected, but the long-term effects may not show until after they leave office. Nonetheless, we're still stuck with those effects.

Fudge for judging the quiz without even looking at the site, and hence misguessing the implications, and for repeatedly criticizing in generalities while refusing to read documentation that I so helpfully tried to provide.

But it's still cool that you used "smote"!  ;D


You're right.  You are a genius, and the rest of us are idiots.  I wholeheartedly apologize for being so stupid and simple, and not taking the time to read your amazing and incredible parodies.  You win. 

...you're missing Arwen's point that someone with that high of an IQ wouldn't have the social compass to know what sig lines others might like or dislike.


Okay...um...I didn't say people with high IQ's aren't competent socially...I said that scientists are.

I have a really high IQ, actually, (I know, because I took a quiz on quizrocket.com) and I'm WAY socially competent.  Definitely not trying to brag...but pretty much everyone thinks I'm awesome.  I hate to say that here, because I know when I say that, it causes Tommy to want to vomit, (I can't find the parody where Tommy commented as much in the comment thread, because it was a parody not written by either of us, and not about either of us...but somehow...there we were) but it's true...I rule. 

Anyway...as I said...I'm super smart, and I'm pretty sure I have better social skills than Obama, even.  I can't find a quiz to verify that one, though. 

Okay...um...I didn't say people with high IQ's aren't competent socially...I said that scientists are.
Independent researchers back up the notion that above a certain level, most have difficulty fitting in, regardless of occupation.

If you're truly interested, go to http://www.prometheussociety.org/, point to Articles > Favorite Articles > The Outsiders.

Independent researchers back up the notion that above a certain level, most have difficulty fitting in, regardless of occupation.

If you're truly interested, go to http://www.prometheussociety.org/, point to Articles > Favorite Articles > The Outsiders.


Some people have trouble fitting in because they are arrogant windbags.

Generally speaking, of course.

Some people have trouble fitting in because they are arrogant windbags.

Generally speaking, of course.

I don't know who you are or what you do here -- there's no exact match to that name in Parody Authors -- but your conversation no longer interests me.