Talk:Strong Bad Email By Length - Revision history

Bleu Ninja: /* Era Table */ nice

2022-06-20T18:11:21Z

Era Table: nice

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:11, 20 June 2022
Line 544:		Line 544:
	:As far as prose, with five entries you very swiftly run out of ways to type "The longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. If Easter eggs are counted, than the longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. The shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [z]. If one counts Easter eggs, then the shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]." again and again and again. The operative info is '''what email''' and '''how long''', but by burying this information in sentence after repetitive sentence it becomes very difficult to scan. Maybe if the prose was entirely rewritten it could come back, but as it was the sentences were hard to parse and tended to run on for too long to be easily followed. --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)		:As far as prose, with five entries you very swiftly run out of ways to type "The longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. If Easter eggs are counted, than the longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. The shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [z]. If one counts Easter eggs, then the shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]." again and again and again. The operative info is '''what email''' and '''how long''', but by burying this information in sentence after repetitive sentence it becomes very difficult to scan. Maybe if the prose was entirely rewritten it could come back, but as it was the sentences were hard to parse and tended to run on for too long to be easily followed. --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
	::Hm, that's fair. It still bothers me that retirement and vacation are handled differently so I'll go ahead and change that. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 14:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)		::Hm, that's fair. It still bothers me that retirement and vacation are handled differently so I'll go ahead and change that. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 14:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
		+	:::That looks better to me! --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 18:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

DEIDATVM at 14:39, 20 June 2022

2022-06-20T14:39:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 20 June 2022
Line 543:		Line 543:
	How come [[retirement]] isn't given as the primary longest email for the Lappy era due to being originally released in two parts, even though [[vacation]] is listed as the longest for the Tandy era despite being released over several weeks? I'm also kinda iffy on whether converting the prose to a table was for the better — as I often am with table conversions — and it seems kinda caveat-heavy to be able to work cleanly as a table. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 12:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)		How come [[retirement]] isn't given as the primary longest email for the Lappy era due to being originally released in two parts, even though [[vacation]] is listed as the longest for the Tandy era despite being released over several weeks? I'm also kinda iffy on whether converting the prose to a table was for the better — as I often am with table conversions — and it seems kinda caveat-heavy to be able to work cleanly as a table. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 12:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
	:As far as prose, with five entries you very swiftly run out of ways to type "The longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. If Easter eggs are counted, than the longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. The shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [z]. If one counts Easter eggs, then the shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]." again and again and again. The operative info is '''what email''' and '''how long''', but by burying this information in sentence after repetitive sentence it becomes very difficult to scan. Maybe if the prose was entirely rewritten it could come back, but as it was the sentences were hard to parse and tended to run on for too long to be easily followed. --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)		:As far as prose, with five entries you very swiftly run out of ways to type "The longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. If Easter eggs are counted, than the longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. The shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [z]. If one counts Easter eggs, then the shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]." again and again and again. The operative info is '''what email''' and '''how long''', but by burying this information in sentence after repetitive sentence it becomes very difficult to scan. Maybe if the prose was entirely rewritten it could come back, but as it was the sentences were hard to parse and tended to run on for too long to be easily followed. --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
		+	::Hm, that's fair. It still bothers me that retirement and vacation are handled differently so I'll go ahead and change that. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 14:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Bleu Ninja: /* Era Table */ why I changed it: hard to read

2022-06-20T01:48:14Z

Era Table: why I changed it: hard to read

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:48, 20 June 2022
Line 542:		Line 542:
	== Era Table ==		== Era Table ==
	How come [[retirement]] isn't given as the primary longest email for the Lappy era due to being originally released in two parts, even though [[vacation]] is listed as the longest for the Tandy era despite being released over several weeks? I'm also kinda iffy on whether converting the prose to a table was for the better — as I often am with table conversions — and it seems kinda caveat-heavy to be able to work cleanly as a table. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 12:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)		How come [[retirement]] isn't given as the primary longest email for the Lappy era due to being originally released in two parts, even though [[vacation]] is listed as the longest for the Tandy era despite being released over several weeks? I'm also kinda iffy on whether converting the prose to a table was for the better — as I often am with table conversions — and it seems kinda caveat-heavy to be able to work cleanly as a table. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 12:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
		+	:As far as prose, with five entries you very swiftly run out of ways to type "The longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. If Easter eggs are counted, than the longest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]. The shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [z]. If one counts Easter eggs, then the shortest [x]-era email was blank, which ran for [y]." again and again and again. The operative info is '''what email''' and '''how long''', but by burying this information in sentence after repetitive sentence it becomes very difficult to scan. Maybe if the prose was entirely rewritten it could come back, but as it was the sentences were hard to parse and tended to run on for too long to be easily followed. --{{User:Bleu Ninja/sig}} 01:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

DEIDATVM: there's a potential joke involving the phrase "prose-to-table movement" somewhere in here but mostly it's just that sometimes I prefer prose

2022-06-19T12:35:51Z

there's a potential joke involving the phrase "prose-to-table movement" somewhere in here but mostly it's just that sometimes I prefer prose

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:35, 19 June 2022
Line 539:		Line 539:

	It's fun when you're auditing a project and realize that the person who likely introduced bad data is yourself. I went through the article history and discovered that {{p\|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Bad_Email_By_Length&diff=374108&oldid=374097 I was the one who added the values}} shown in the Stated Duration column. When I try to reconcile them now, they don't all add up. Before I just update the article, I wanted to post the data here to see if anybody sees where I got the original numbers and to check my current work (note that all the dates are from [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]]; I didn't audit them against the articles or the wiki history). Also, [[dullard]] is listed as having been a record holder, but that doesn't appear to actually be the case (I kept separate duration values in the table above so that the math could be directly compared, but those would be combined if it is no longer listed as a record holder). [[1 step ahead]] is a record holder only if the entire email is counted, not just one of the parts, as apparently the official time does. I didn't audit our Length values against the articles or the toons themselves, and I notice a couple of them have been altered since I made my edit above. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 18:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)		It's fun when you're auditing a project and realize that the person who likely introduced bad data is yourself. I went through the article history and discovered that {{p\|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Bad_Email_By_Length&diff=374108&oldid=374097 I was the one who added the values}} shown in the Stated Duration column. When I try to reconcile them now, they don't all add up. Before I just update the article, I wanted to post the data here to see if anybody sees where I got the original numbers and to check my current work (note that all the dates are from [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]]; I didn't audit them against the articles or the wiki history). Also, [[dullard]] is listed as having been a record holder, but that doesn't appear to actually be the case (I kept separate duration values in the table above so that the math could be directly compared, but those would be combined if it is no longer listed as a record holder). [[1 step ahead]] is a record holder only if the entire email is counted, not just one of the parts, as apparently the official time does. I didn't audit our Length values against the articles or the toons themselves, and I notice a couple of them have been altered since I made my edit above. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 18:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Era Table ==
		+	How come [[retirement]] isn't given as the primary longest email for the Lappy era due to being originally released in two parts, even though [[vacation]] is listed as the longest for the Tandy era despite being released over several weeks? I'm also kinda iffy on whether converting the prose to a table was for the better — as I often am with table conversions — and it seems kinda caveat-heavy to be able to work cleanly as a table. {{User:DEIDATVM/sig}} 12:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Minecraft lover147: /* Motivation */

2021-06-19T00:50:20Z

Motivation

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:50, 19 June 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)		:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)

-	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --[[User ~~talk~~:Minecraft lover147~~\|<span style="color:#00ab33;">Minecraft</span><span style="color:#734e00;"> lover147<~~/~~span>]]~~	+	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --{{User:Minecraft lover147/sig}}

	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands		:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands

Minecraft lover147: /* Motivation */

2021-06-19T00:47:54Z

Motivation

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:47, 19 June 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)		:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)

-	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --[[User:Minecraft lover147\|Minecraft lover147]]	+	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --[[User talk:Minecraft lover147\|<span style="color:#00ab33;">Minecraft</span><span style="color:#734e00;"> lover147</span>]]

	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands		:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands

Minecraft lover147: /* Motivation */

2021-06-19T00:46:45Z

Motivation

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:46, 19 June 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)		:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)

-	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --Minecraft lover147	+	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --[[User:Minecraft lover147\|Minecraft lover147]]

	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands		:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands

Minecraft lover147: /* Motivation */

2021-06-19T00:41:57Z

Motivation

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:41, 19 June 2021
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)		:I was curious about what emails were the longest compared to others. If not enough people care about a page like this, it can get deleted. --[[User:Joshua\|Joshua]] 19:04, 20 Mar 2005 (MST)
-
-	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands

	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --Minecraft lover147		::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --Minecraft lover147
		+
		+	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands

	:::And why not create a gigantic Wiki documenting every word of a silly Flash animated website? Oh, wait, that's already been done.		:::And why not create a gigantic Wiki documenting every word of a silly Flash animated website? Oh, wait, that's already been done.

Minecraft lover147: /* Motivation */

2021-06-19T00:41:03Z

Motivation

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:41, 19 June 2021
Line 12:		Line 12:

	:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands		:: May be you could start a page to list emails by their number of words, the sum total "Meh"s of the cheat. you could alweys try to count how many times homestar say stupid stuff compared to homsar, or better yet, make a graph out of it? Why not? --Someone Who Thinks You Guys Have too Much Spare Time On Your Hands
		+
		+	::I agree with Joshua on this. It's cool to me to see how the lengths change and which one is longest and all that. I respect everyone working on this page. --Minecraft lover147

	:::And why not create a gigantic Wiki documenting every word of a silly Flash animated website? Oh, wait, that's already been done.		:::And why not create a gigantic Wiki documenting every word of a silly Flash animated website? Oh, wait, that's already been done.

It's dot com: /* Audit */ clarify dullard values

2021-02-05T15:37:14Z

Audit: clarify dullard values

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:37, 5 February 2021
Line 536:		Line 536:
	:''Calculated Duration = the date of the next record minus the date of the current record, expressed in weeks''		:''Calculated Duration = the date of the next record minus the date of the current record, expressed in weeks''

-	It's fun when you're auditing a project and realize that the person who likely introduced bad data is yourself. I went through the article history and discovered that {{p\|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Bad_Email_By_Length&diff=374108&oldid=374097 I was the one who added the values}} shown in the Stated Duration column. When I try to reconcile them now, they don't all add up. Before I just update the article, I wanted to post the data here to see if anybody sees where I got the original numbers and to check my current work (note that all the dates are from [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]]; I didn't audit them against the articles or the wiki history). Also, [[dullard]] is listed as having been a record holder, but that doesn't appear to actually be the case. [[1 step ahead]] is a record holder only if the entire email is counted, not just one of the parts, as apparently the official time does. I didn't audit our Length values against the articles or the toons themselves, and I notice a couple of them have been altered since I made my edit above. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 18:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)	+	It's fun when you're auditing a project and realize that the person who likely introduced bad data is yourself. I went through the article history and discovered that {{p\|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Bad_Email_By_Length&diff=374108&oldid=374097 I was the one who added the values}} shown in the Stated Duration column. When I try to reconcile them now, they don't all add up. Before I just update the article, I wanted to post the data here to see if anybody sees where I got the original numbers and to check my current work (note that all the dates are from [[Strong Bad Email Release Dates]]; I didn't audit them against the articles or the wiki history). Also, [[dullard]] is listed as having been a record holder, but that doesn't appear to actually be the case (I kept separate duration values in the table above so that the math could be directly compared, but those would be combined if it is no longer listed as a record holder). [[1 step ahead]] is a record holder only if the entire email is counted, not just one of the parts, as apparently the official time does. I didn't audit our Length values against the articles or the toons themselves, and I notice a couple of them have been altered since I made my edit above. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 18:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)