Hehe
Oh, don't worry. I don't think that anyone will kick us off as long as we resolve this before a moderator notices
I thank you for supporting my right to speak my mind; I, of course, support your right to speak yours also. I like to think that I, too, will change my mind in the face of convincing evidence -- that is one of the primary purposes of logic. Unfortunately, it sometimes is not as easy as it sounds, and not just for reasons of pride.
Your apology is accepted readily; I have met many newbies in my time, and your shouting spree isn't a first -- your response probably is though. Most newbies take great offense (for some inexplicable reason) at being told that they shouldn't use caps because it is considered shouting. I understand you were trying to make a point; that's okay.
Making bold, italics etc is accomplished by means of vB (visualBasic) scripting that is built into this forum. It's similar to HTML, which is the code that all web-pages are made with, but a little simpler in most respects. For example:
- in HTML, to achieve a bold effect, you would type <b>bolded text</b> The <> tags indicate an HTML command imbedded in what would normally be read as normal text to be displayed. The "b" indicates bold, of course, and the forward-slash is used to close the bold tag section.
- in vB, to achieve a bold effect, you would type {b}bolded text{/b} but replacing the curled brackets with square ones []. I can't type square ones or it would just make the text bold and really tell you nothing
Always remember to close your formatting tags with a / or your entire document from the opening tag onward will be formatted.
For a more detailed explanation of all the vB tags available on this forum (though there are some there that they don't mention, like [color="00fd00"]colour[/color]), check the
frequently asked questions.
Flamebait? It's nerd slang for a post that is just asking to be flamed. For example, if I post a comment deliberately trying to rile a response, it's flamebait. On fora where posts are moderated, a flamebait comment can be moderated down so it has a low score, so people don't necessarily have to view it -- if you set your preferences to view all posts with a score of +1 or above, flamebaits and trolls won't be seen because they'll be modded down to -1. Flaming someone, obviously enough, is oppression with extreme prejudice; a comment that deserves to be flamed is flamebait. I know dictionary.com can explain it much better than I, so here's a definition:
flamebait A posting intended to trigger a flame war, or one that invites flame in reply.
troll A posting which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare with flamebait). Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their minds.
Generally, flamebait will contain foul language and obscene references to goats and suchlike, while trolls will be more civil, but ultimately serving the same purpose (trolls are generally more skilful). For examples, check out
slashdot: news for nerds. That has some most excellent examples, if you're up to it. Personally, I wouldn't wish those comments on anyone. Nowadays, the words troll and flamebait have become rather interchangeable; half the moderators on slashdot don't know the difference.
As you say, I normally have a "reference" window open also; I just didn't get around to it that time because I wasn't making a long post, or responding to questions.
What you say about quoting FD is fair enough; it just seemed a little ambiguous is all.
It wasn't Me by Shaggy is just one of the thousands of examples -- heck, it's not even restricted to quotes at all. Generally known as plagiarism, and sometimes misinformation. I had the
Stargate motion picture Theme, End Credits and Overture for about half a year before I finally discovered that they weren't by John Williams after all (despite sounding remarkably like his style), but are, in fact, by David Arnold. Just because one person mislabelled an MP3: that person sent it to about 20 others using Napster, they in turn spread it around so that, in the end, half of these tracks on Napster had John Williams in their "artist" field, and half had David Arnold (of course, being a John Williams fan and not having heard of David Arnold before, I chose to believe the former...)
I'm sure that the others are being vastly entertained by our disagreements -- I'd love to continue them tomorrow...whenever that is -- my, is it 0116 already? The amusement factor is probably why we haven't been reprimanded already
