Okay you fucking template. I’m giving you another try. I hope you don’t overload my server again like you did the last time i put you up. At least i think that was you. Could’ve just been bad timing or something. But anyway, not that there’s anything wrong with the old layout (aside from the stupid 1 1 1 1 1 1 thing in the comments on certain browsers – i don’t know how to fix that), but i figured maybe this one could be a good replacement (Angelbaby disapproves though -_-). So let me know if this one works or if it’s too slow or if you prefer the old one.
UPDATE: The new one is just too slow. So back to the old one for now.
UPDATE 2: Huzzah! Thanks to ThatGuy, the 1 1 1 1 1 1 thing has been fixed and now everybody can start replying and referring to other commenters by their comment number! see the comments as it should be regardless of what browser you’re using! Thanks again ThatGuy!
It’s different, but I like it.
#1 | Comment by Scott — October 24, 2006 @ 5:59 am
More “Add to” links than I can shake a stick at.
(Not that I wanna shake a stick at a rectangle of links, lol.)
#2 | Comment by gamekid — October 24, 2006 @ 6:05 am
(oh, and I like.)
#3 | Comment by gamekid — October 24, 2006 @ 6:12 am
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
#4 | Comment by Ratsy99 — October 24, 2006 @ 7:36 am
Well, I finally see, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.
Seems ok by me
#5 | Comment by THOR — October 24, 2006 @ 7:56 am
i dont know if its just my slow connection but do any of you notice any difference in the loading time? could just be me.
#6 | Comment by Justin — October 24, 2006 @ 8:29 am
Oh yeah, there is a load time difference.
#7 | Comment by BabyEater — October 24, 2006 @ 8:50 am
much improved. But the bar on the right loads slower indeed.
#8 | Comment by Gromnir1020 — October 24, 2006 @ 8:50 am
Really like the new template, but if it slows the site..
Perhaps you should just kinda lighten the site?
#9 | Comment by louis — October 24, 2006 @ 8:54 am
looking into ways to do that right now. it’s probably the recent comments thing. will check to see if it uses up more processes than the old one.
#10 | Comment by Justin — October 24, 2006 @ 8:57 am
Yeah it’s a lot slower than it was. I thought it was just me. Glad to know that it’s your fault and not mine.
#11 | Comment by Jonstafa — October 24, 2006 @ 9:04 am
pwnt.
yep to bad.
#12 | Comment by AngelBaby — October 24, 2006 @ 9:21 am
ok back to the old one again. the new one is just too slow. no matter.
the only thing that’s wrong with this one is the 1 1 1 1 1 1 thing in the comments.
i still dont know how to fix that.
it only shows up correctly on firefox and newer versions of IE as far as i know (and maybe opera too?)
#13 | Comment by Justin — October 24, 2006 @ 9:21 am
why are you thinking about templates and not pornography? its totally inappropriate
#14 | Comment by guy — October 24, 2006 @ 10:13 am
Yeah, Opera does that too.
And Feedburner gives errors all the times. That sucks.
#15 | Comment by louis — October 24, 2006 @ 10:14 am
feedburner feed busted? it looks fine when i subscribe to http://feeds.feedburner.com/dontlinkthis using NetNewsWire.
#16 | Comment by Justin — October 24, 2006 @ 10:17 am
I use Safari 1.3 on my Mac OS X 10.3 and it’s doing the 1 1 1 1 1 1 thing in the comments. No matter…
#17 | Comment by sosomuchfun — October 24, 2006 @ 10:28 am
I’m using Thunderbird as my RSSfeedreadapplication (or whatsoever)
And I used to get the whole post, including pink background and stuff, just like visiting the site. But now all I get is some white page, with the content of the log and pictures won’t work. But it’s not that bad, cause now I know when to visit the site.
#18 | Comment by louis — October 24, 2006 @ 10:39 am
“ok back to the old one again. the new one is just too slow. no matter.
the only thing that’s wrong with this one is the 1 1 1 1 1 1 thing in the comments.
i still dont know how to fix that.”
Justin, the template is not valid XHTML (here’s one example), so the pages really shouldn’t work.
Among its [many] problems, the list markup is completely wrong. The “li” tags in the page should be direct children of the “ol” tag:
[ol][li]…content…[/li][/ol] (where [‘s are angle brackets)
not
[ol]…tags that shouldn’t be here…[li]…content…[/li]…tags that shouldn’t be here…[/ol].
That’s why IE etc. think each “li” is a separate list: they should.
What I’m trying to say: Whoever made this template can’t write Web pages as they should be written, and that’s causing the lists to look ugly in IE and (if sosomuchfun is correct) Safari. Find someone who actually knows how to make HTML right.
#19 | Comment by gamekid — October 24, 2006 @ 11:25 am
…but not me ’cause I’m a little busy in life. 🙁
#20 | Comment by gamekid — October 24, 2006 @ 11:27 am
Strictly speaking, you’re incorrect, though that is the cause of the problem. Older browsers incorrectly interperet the ol tag.
Justin, I’ll contact you to see if we can fix it.
#21 | Comment by ThatGuy — October 24, 2006 @ 11:47 am
Re: 1 1 1 1, It may have something to do with this 226 Errors.
#22 | Comment by Ryan — October 24, 2006 @ 1:04 pm
old template? new template? Looks exactly as pink and perky as it did before.
If there’s a difference I’m too lazy to notice.
#23 | Comment by DisconcertedGeorge — October 24, 2006 @ 1:36 pm
Missed it, damn. Oh well.
#24 | Comment by deedas — October 24, 2006 @ 3:53 pm
At least I can read what Justin writes in the comments now. But damn that 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
#25 | Comment by Steven — October 24, 2006 @ 4:13 pm
I’ve implemented the solutions for both issues on a test section. Fixes on the live site should be forthcoming…
#26 | Comment by ThatGuy — October 24, 2006 @ 7:04 pm
i don’t care if the site is lynx-browser compatible.
i’m only here for the words. ass be damned.
#27 | Comment by tehpunk — October 25, 2006 @ 12:17 am
But does it work on the newly released firefox 2.0?
#28 | Comment by pyrates — October 25, 2006 @ 10:30 pm
yay i see numbers!
thatguy > justin ?
😮
#29 | Comment by AngelBaby — October 25, 2006 @ 10:37 pm
Using FF 2.0 right now and it looks the same as always.
#30 | Comment by DisconcertedGeorge — October 25, 2006 @ 10:44 pm
I’m so happy to be #30! And to know it!
#31 | Comment by El Payo — October 25, 2006 @ 11:37 pm
DAMN YOU Disconcerted George.
#32 | Comment by El Payo — October 25, 2006 @ 11:38 pm
Works fine on FireFox 2 on the Macintosh, same with Safari.
#33 | Comment by El Payo — October 25, 2006 @ 11:40 pm
#31 har har.
Saw you typing through my monitor.
Looks okay in IE7 under Vista as well.
#34 | Comment by DisconcertedGeorge — October 26, 2006 @ 12:12 am
VISTA?
do u mean the beta?
or what?
#35 | Comment by Prity — November 1, 2006 @ 7:07 am