Talk:Strong Bad Email

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 21:03, 6 January 2006 by Tom (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Strong Bad Email Talk: Current | Messages 1-20 | Messages 21-33 | Messages 34-50 | Messages 51-75 | Messages 76-100 | Messages 101-120

Ding! Strong Bad Email is a featured article, which means it showcases an important part of the Homestar Runner body of work and/or highlights the fine work of this wiki. We also might just think it's cool. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.


Contents

An oddment

I was watching SBEmails. Then, I saw the flash file for ther menu. It still has the compy! Amy Whifflepoof

Chinese

Okay, what's with the Chinese writing? Iv'e never seen that on the wiki... Is it suppost to be there? Homestramy20 08:57, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Given that they were all added by an anonymous user to this and a couple of other pages all within an hour or so, and they're all links to commercial websites, probably not. --phlip TC 10:04, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Here's an answer for you: No Chinese allowed!

Here's an answer for you: No Chinese allowed! The 386

Newest Scroll Rap

Hey, did anyone notice that Strong Bad's head doesn't move while he is saying his latest email rap? Is this worthy to put on the page? «Rob» 10:39, 12 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... It is a bit strange. Perhaps under 'remarks'. There are alot of places that do call for it within the rap. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 04:54, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

36 1/2?

I noticed somebody replaced '? 1/2' to '36 1/2' for the Toons Menu Stu email. How do we know it's 36 and a half? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 04:50, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Template

I think that the sbemail articles (NOT the toons, articles), should have a template. Anyone agree? Rogue Leader / (my talk) 02:59, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean something in addition to Template:Strong Bad Email? If so, I don't think that is necessary. -- Tom 03:10, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I mean for Statistics, length, place, ect. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 03:11, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
You're talking about converting the additional information section into a template and then putting it on all of those pages? ...Why not? Seems like a good idea to me. (Note: I'm not sure where all you were planning on putting the template, but I don't think it should go on the emails themselves, just on this page and the various specialty pages.) — It's dot com 03:17, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
No, that template won't go on to the emails themselves, just the information pages. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 03:34, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Well, it sounds useful, especially since there's nothing on those pages tying them together. I think you should go for it, at the very least so we can see it and make an informed decision. The worst that could happen would be that nobody likes it and it gets reverted, but the way you describe it, I think everyone will like it fine. — It's dot com 22:32, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
It looks like E.L. Cool went ahead and made a template, so I added it to the pages. I think the green was intended to match the Tandy, but maybe a different color would be better. What do you think? — It's dot com 05:08, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Haha.. I didn't even read this post! I thought that I was on a roll with The Cheat Commandos template and Limozeen one that I just went ahead and made it. And yeah, the green is for the Tendy, but you can switch it if you like. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 18:20, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I went ahead and added Strong Bad Email Statistics to the template. After all, it was a featured article at one point and I noticed that the article no longer linked to Strong Bad Email. —THE PAPER PREEEOW 02:08, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Hi, nice one. Forgot about in. Chack out Talk:20X6 for some debate if this taplate should stay of not. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 03:42, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Spin-offs?

We mention a few spin-off toons and characters in the opening paragraph, but there's so many things on the site that Strong Bad emails created. Should we have a section on this page for stuff on the site that came from Strong Bad emails? - Camalex(talk) 03:28, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

That's a prooty good idea. - Joshua 11:47, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)
So, um, where should I put it on here? I don't think it's worthy of it's own article, is it? - Camalex(talk) 20:42, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Do TBC change the names of the users who send emails?

Topic on GameFAQS...

From: zztman5 | Posted: 10/3/2005 10:17:42 AM | Message Detail | #004
 ...
I sent that email. That exact same email, exact down to text and everything... with the exception of the name. They changed my name on it. What the ****.
 what the crap/10


From: Alastor the Stylish | Posted: 10/3/2005 11:31:02 AM | Message Detail | #005
 They always change the names on them. I thought everyone knew that <_<

Zuh? Is this true? I've never heard this... If so, should it be remarked somewhere?

What about montage? We know it was sent by a wiki user and TBC didn't change the name. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 20:47, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I think it's real easy for someone to claim that on an off-topic forum. What kind of evidence does the original poster have, or for that matter the person who claims that "everyone" knows this? Every indication in commentaries and interviews that I've ever seen is that TBC leave an email exactly as-is, with the exception that they might trim it for length. Certainly most of the names and locations in the various emails are vague enough that TBC wouldn't need to change them, and I believe the Legal page gives them the right to use the submissions. Besides, where would the joke be if there was no real Dan and Linda, Monkeydude, Someone, or Anonymous Contributor? — It's dot com 20:56, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Yes, really. I think at least one of those guys is not being truthful. There's no proof to them, whereas the Brothers Chaps have always indicated that their emails are exactly the same, right down to the name (which, I suspect, may be one reason why they never use mine: coz they can't pronounce the name). There's a lot of proof towards what It's dot com said. Personally, I think it's just someone looking for attention. It's a lot easier to say they used your email and changed the name than it is to actually get your email answered. --DorianGray

DVD Redirects

Seen as we already have a numerical redirect to all the Strong Bad Emails, does anyone else think that making capitalised DVD redirects would be a good idea for all emails this is possible with (that is, all emails from Some Kinda Robot to Do Over, excluding Homsar, Pom Pom, Marzipan and possibly Interview) --videlectrix.pngENUSY discussionitem_icon.gif user.gifmail_icon.gif, 22:38, 17 October 2005 (BST)

I think it's already been done for a couple, namely Army and Impression. --DorianGray

Actual sbemail program?

Would it be difficult to write an sbemail.exe program? I would like the "DELETED!" feature in my default mail client, but I also like the dos based look to it. What would be the best language to write it in? has it been done?

Agentjs03 15:51, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Erm, my guess is the best place to ask/check for that kind of stuff is the fan stuff wiki. I'd suggest browsing through the different categories to see if it's not already been done, if not ask there! Let me know if you find anything. Good luck! --Stux 18:26, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Something like Mutt perhaps? -- Tom 01:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


A Possible Poll?

Is there a way someone could make a possible poll to vote on the best email ever, it would be very cool...

Sorry, but this is a knowledge base. We aren't about polling people. Perhaps you could check out some of the polls in the forum? -- Tom 02:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

{{clear}}

Without
With
I noticed Dot Com reverted my edit, here's why I put the clear up. On larger browser windows, the picture overlaps the top of the list, looking kinda goofy. Although the clear does make the page somewhat larger. Does anybody else have any opinions about the clear setting? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 13:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, what resolution is this running at? Is it 640x480? Is the resolution shown in your pictures the resolution that you normally run your computer at? --Stux 15:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm guessing 1280x1024, based on where the text wraps. The overlapping didn't happen for me at that resolution, but then I realised - if you hide the TOC it does. Does the change I just made suit everyone? --phlip TC 15:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, that's very nice now, Phil. Thanks. — It's dot com 16:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Yeah, I have a big monitor, and I also like keeping text small to reduce scrollage. Sometimes the big resolution creates special problems for me. Thanks for fixing this one though, philip. (Oh, and I hate TOCs, I never display them) ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 01:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Navigation template

So I decided to be bold, but it appears I was a bit too bold. Anyway, check out the new navigation template at the top of emails 1 through 11, and comment here. The rationale for this is that it's very handy to be able to flash through a sequential group of items without scrolling down to the bottom of the page every time. My goal was a consistent navigation that keeps the "next" link in (usually) the same place on each page, to minimize the need to move the mouse. This would be useful when browsing email by email, perhaps to see what characters and places make an appearance in each, or perhaps just to read each synopsis. Such a thing would be very useful to me right now, for example, as I am trying to compile a little list of the most "important" emails so my wife can read them in order and get a feeling for overall chronology without reading all 130+ emails. User:Bill Martinson/sig 17:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Emails some kinda robot and portrait demonstrate the tweaked versions of the template for the first and last emails. Note that, for example, when email #140 gets released, portrait will have to be changed from the sbelast template to the sbe template, and the name and number for 140 will have to be added to it. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

comments about the presence of the template

I'm pretty neutral at this point, maybe a bit on the positive side. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 18:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC) Actually, I'm leaning further positive, the more I think about it. However, with emails that are disambiguated, would the navigation template remain at the top of the screen, or go one line down? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 18:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Go one line down. I don't think we want the Strong Bad email #X line to come before the disambiguation line. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
The only other thing I can think of about the format, is that going forward is easy to just click click click, but going backwards requires moving the mouse around a bit every email. Can't really think of an easy way to fix it though, unless you put forward on the right side of the screen, back on the left side of the screen, and some form of a main title or number in the middle of the screen. What do you think of that? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 18:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
As it is now, the template distracts a bit from the thumbnail image. My eye is expecting just an image to be there, clean and unobstructed, like we have in about 90-95% of our articles. See a few random articles to compare. -- Tom 18:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
What if the links were small and gray? As said: "It's more functional than aesthetic". — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 18:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
That might help Tom's issue, but I wouldn't like the inconsistent formatting of hyperlinks. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit conflict] The proximity to the image bothered me, too, but I accepted it as a compromise. Another possibility is to put the navigation inline; something like one of these, perhaps:
But I think I find that more intrusive than where it is now, above the (optional) image. Anyway, the fourth or fifth one is probably the best; in this context I'd be looking for a minimal footprint. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
The 4th or 5th options could also take advantage of our sbemail3-type redirects, and we could then shorten the template to three simple variables. You could probably also manage a Greasemonkey script similar to this one to work like that too, if we end up not going with the template at all. Though if we do go with this template, I think I'd rather have the names than just the numbers. -- Tom 21:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

comments about the presentation of the template

Perhaps a different color, to make it stand out better? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 18:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I dunno ... it's more functional than aesthetic. In fact, I didn't want to draw a lot of attention to it, since this is the top of the page. Part of the reason I flush-righted it was for the "next-link in the same place" goal, but another part was to remove it from the main text stream of the beginning of the page. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
While you should never place form over function, I would still argue that they're both important.
Instead of:
Strong Bad Email #2 << (#1) some kinda robot | butt IQ (#3) >>
How about something a little smaller and self-contained:
Strong Bad Email #2
← [1] some kinda robot | butt IQ [3] →
— It's dot com 18:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Fixing the width of the box on the right?
Strong Bad Email #9
← [8] brianrietta | trevor the vampire [10] →
Strong Bad Email #2
← [1] some kinda robot | butt IQ [3] →
 -- Tom 20:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

new thought

If I could wish any wish this holiday season, first would be the crap about the kids*, but second would be this: The ability to define an article as part of a named series. All such articles would be numbered to define the sequence within the series, and when displayed, would automatically get "previous" and "next" links in the toolbox, or above or to the right of the title, or someplace like that. Being a software developer, maybe I should look into what it would take to write a wiki extension that does something along these lines. User:Bill Martinson/sig 18:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

* Adapted from an old Steve Martin monologue on Saturday Night Live
I think that sketch is hilarious and wish I could see it again. — It's dot com 18:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Strong_Bad_Email"