Plastic Tub:Community Portal
From Plastic Tub
|Table of contents|
-- Payne 01:19, 7 Jan 2006 (EST) The warning messages that you see at the top of the screen are my fault. Sorry. This is just a cosmetic error, but I can't seem to correct it. Please check your email for details.
-- Payne 18:27, 7 Jan 2006 (EST) Problem fixed. Again, sorry.
Italian Musicians etc.
--Adkins 04:42, 22 Oct 2005 (EDT)After reading the email Tim got from Mark, it made me wonder if that there were other reactions out there other than befuddlement....how can we guage the effect of what we're doing? After well over a year I'm curious. Primarily, I write for myself and for you guys, but I've liked the bits of feedback we've stumbled across. What are you're thoughts on adding a Tub message board? Too corny? Will it corrupt us? Anyone simply hate message boards? Just a thought I'm not particularly attached to but not adverse to, either....
Also, I have some desire to talk about where we're going with all this, as Tim has brought up more than once. Can we set some goals of where we want to be in say, six months? A publishable Tub? A coffee-table book, a Taschen-style history?
Just a few thoughts for this morning....
- --Payne 22:53, 23 Oct 2005 (EDT) Regarding feedback: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page) has a link to "Contact Us" that is omnipresent under Navigation (mid-left hand side of the page--just below Help). That seems like an easy way to encourage feedback--it could make email contact more visible, and therefore more frequent, which I'd like to see. (BTW, today's featured Wikipedia story on Schizophrenia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia) features a nice pic of an Opened Head.)
--Adkins 16:50, 25 Oct 2005 (EDT)Yeah, Tim wasn't keen on the board idea, and I can understand that...perhaps a contact link in the navigation bar would be a good idea though. I don't want to be a publicity hound or a compliment fisher, but some kind of feedback would be very cool, imo.
Belaboring the Obvious
Let's not have links to template pages as a primary source. This is like forcing peasants to drink air, when they come here, in fact, in a fit of airs.
- Fuckinay. There is much of this. Templates are amusing aids to navigation, which is to say, a means. We are not Jesuits, here -- unfortunately. Let us not continue the trend.
(to self) Fucking proddies.
--Payne 00:30, 7 Oct 2005 (EDT) Reply from the offender: agreed. And removed, as well. While cleaning up these things, i bumped into an old discussion (Template_talk:SecretSocieties) wherein a good idea on the usage of templates was brought up but never acted upon. I lazily quote rather than paraphrase:
- I'd like to see quasi-desiderata elements on pages, like Didja Know?, featuring a paragraph of info in small text, carved out of the main entry. For instance, you could put vital statistics on personages, like addisson weighed 160lbs, was 6'8" etc, like the back of a football card.
- Side note: BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4316698.stm) peppers their site w/ many template-y things...
is what I confess to be, witnessing the picture of the week, which this week, is a flash file. And no formatting is broken ... Rock and/or Roll! Good stuff. Must make some more of those.
--Adkins 05:17, 14 Aug 2005 (EDT)Hey fellas, I'm out of here for about a week. Seee you when I get back from vacation!
Error on Template:SuspiciousDeaths Discussion
- I'm going to test this on a couple pages. If you don't like it, say so here and I'll remove it. (Also: should I drop the last 2 bullets?)
Here's the error message that I received when I hit "discussion":
- Internal Server Error
- The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
- Please contact the server administrator, email@example.com and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
- More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
- Apache/1.3.29 Server at plastictub.vaporslave.com Port 80
--Undule 02:47, 26 Jul 2005 (EDT) Dave, I was able to create a discussion page using the method I used last time I ran into this error -- saving it out with a one word "dummy" statement. Once the page is created, all seems fine. This must be a bug in the newest version, (i hope!) though I admit to not investigating it very thoroughly. I'll look into it -- likely we will simply need to upgrade to the latest build.
--Undule 05:45, 15 Jul 2005 (EDT) hey, is the tub endless or does it mount to something, charge it, splay out? Is it saying anything? The art that processes for ever is good and all, but fuckinay. Why whenever I bring anything like this up two weeks later we are distracted by organization? Who wants to take over the Tub? It's becoming dull, masturbatory, no longer revelatory. MUST FIX OR ABANDON is my thinking. Do you guys at all dig?
-- Payne 22:53, 19 Jul 2005 (EDT) Well I don't think it ought to be abandoned. If you've got some specific fixes in mind, lay 'em out and I'll try to take 'em on. I think there's plenty of room to recharge this in good directions. For god's sake, Tim, post Mamu--I want to see what you've got cooking. But at any rate, I'm caught up with some other shit and will most likely be gone till Monday, when, opened-head willing, I'll have time to post like a motherfucker for a couple days. Meanwhile, I'm sorry to miss the Tub's birthday. I'll try to peek on Friday night to see if anything hot's cookin'...
--Adkins 09:44, 25 Jun 2005 (EDT)What's the benifit of using ogg over wav files for sound? I wanted to upload a small file but ran into the preferred format problem. Any recommendations of a free and simple file converter? --Sven - Just upload it as an mp3 and it will work fine. If you need any wave editors I hve recently seen a few open source ones that looked fairly simple. they probably have a convertor program that will move all that stuff from format to format. The name eludes me now but look under open source wave editing and conversions- Sorry haven't tubbed much. I have had to do more computer maintenance.
-- Payne 20:00, 23 Jun 2005 (EDT): Wikipedia uses pages called “portals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiportal)” that are intended to introduce large topics. I’m not sure if that concept would totally work out here, but I thought I’d bounce it off you all. The basic idea seems to be to present something a bit more “user-friendly” than a Category page. We could, for example, set up a portal for Accidental Associationalism. It wouldn’t replace the article on Accidental Associationalism, instead, it would serve as a brief intro to the idea along with links to some of the more relevant and interesting pages. (See for example, the Wikipedia portal on Star Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Star_Wars), vs. the article on Star Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars) versus the category Star Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Star_Wars).) I’m wondering if a few portals could serve as some good jumping points for visitors – a way to present some broad topics with links to some of our better pages. Any thought?
--Undule 09:03, 25 Jun 2005 (EDT) I this is the perfect stack upon which we can build further structure -- will it add to the ongoing narrative? Unlikely. Will it pump up the processual jam? Hells yeah. Kick it out, Dave -- though I would suggest keeping the portal concept large, which is to say, n o portals for the tiny in measure -- no fallen stone portals, or occult bbq portals, etc. But a portal for Glossary? Perfect. A portal for Extant Works, with emphasis doled out with fine tuned essay? Indeed! It should, however, mimic the structure of the main page which is unfortunately, fluxed.
--Adkins 09:44, 25 Jun 2005 (EDT)Does a portal diifer from a category in that we can do a "cross-category" portal for a larger concept, ie Death Cults, which would cover Mormo and Molech etc., functionaing like a category for things which aren't exactly categories but themes? A good idea.
--Adkins 13:10, 16 Jun 2005 (EDT) Well, according to the log, our first page was put up on July 23rd 2004, making our first birthday in just over a month...a saturday, even. I suggest we all get into the tub about the same time and blast away for a few hours solid, some kind of editing throw down to celebrate. Ideas?
-- Payne 00:28, 17 Jun 2005 (EDT) A year! That's somewhere around 10 pages/week! A birthday is cause for celebration. Wish we could all fly to France. I may be biking the North Shore of Lake Superior that weekend, and therefore be off line. But this trip may be falling apart, in which case I'd be up for a good hoe down of some sort.
--Undule 09:08, 25 Jun 2005 (EDT) Plastic tub was launched on may 17 of last year. The server dates have been reset due to early problems, but the database survived intact, after being reset. However, I can settle on jul 23. That date I plan to transfer Plastic Tub to a Norwegian server, costing three times as much a year, but insuring careful scores beyond that which we could amalgamate from the States. We can meet in Texas, if only for the murder of peripheral figures.
First International Wiki Conference
Check it out: http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
OK, I made a new PDF with open office....I wanted to upload but can't do it on the wiki...I have to put it on the vaporslave site directly. How can I do that...would you prefer I send the pdf to you or is there some way I can access it? What do you think about doing the redbook etc. in pdf? --Undule 18:28, 12 May 2005 (EDT) Sorry, I didn't see this until now -- just go ahead and send me the PDF. What style did you use? I'd really like to keep the Diverse Template. Also on footnotes -- I'd like to do them like this (http://www.bosrup.com/web/overlib/), what do you guys think?
- I dig this overLib thing. I'd use it if it were available. -- Payne 00:06, 14 May 2005 (EDT)
Image Chill out And Stubs
I think we need to chill on the image additions to pages unless said images are of some notable quality -- which is to say, something unique or otherwise deserving of inclusion, not simply a picture of a foot or something like that. The tub is a work in progress, I remind, and there is no need to "rush it" into a graphically dense state.
I added a category to the stub template, so if you want to whack on stubs, you can find them in said category. Be aware, however, that the stub designation seems to have gotten a little out of hand, I think. By some definitions, anything under a paragraph is a stub. Not so. Not every entry has to be a monster -- short and sweet does the job sometimes. See "rush it" above.
I'm not trying to be a twat, here -- and I apologize if I come off as jackbooted.
- Hey man, stop oppressing me! ;) But seriously, on my part, I've been whacking in stubs where I felt they were really needed, esp. with the "philosophical definitions." Mainly because someone who comes to the tub will see Accidental Associationalism and will first go to those pages to see what it's all about. So far, pages like Accidentalism etc. are pretty short and still in the provisionary (?) state they were in from the get-go. The tub will really benefit from fleshing those entries out. Not too much, not a full explanation, just something....better. (btw, not to foist these tasks off on others, I'll add my two cents, but for the basic text, I'm kind of fuddled as to how to approach it best) Other stubs, like Balthazar Buehb, I put in because his bio ends just as he's starting University. So, while avoiding "stubbifying" the short and sweet variety, some pages may still need the designation. In any event, point noted on my part. As for images, yeah. A look through the tub may be in order in this regard, take out the mediocre. Ain't that shot of Nixon and Reagan a beaut', though?
All that said, I do think the new thing with the Owl, the possibilities of the Opened Head, the Pimp etc are pretty good and am diggin' the development of the Molech/Mormo/Choco "story." Although we're still moving along well-established lines, I think these lines are going off into new and dare I say, exciting directions. I can't tell what's completely fictive and "real" citation anymore. I don't mean to do the love-in thing but we're in a good groove at the moment, pretty much in synch and each new tidbit seems to turn back upon itself while growing outward, linking up in ways we planned and in some unexpected ways as well.
My next job, if you will, like I said earlier but haven't done yet, is to start with the original "ligues" and work my way towards the contemporary, adding bits and bobs. The Pinque, the Cancerous Mask, the Italian Composers, the Kook Gang, the shipping industry, etc. Not tie it all together in a neat package, but at least make some more connections or insinuations.
PS. Tim, and everybody for that matter, I have a lot of trust in yr judgement, so if I add something (like the plagiarized text), especially imagery you feel isn't up to snuff, just take it out. Images can easily be replaced, and text can be mercilessy edited to make it work. Just be nice :)
- (T) Hell yeah, I'm of the same mind, Adkins. I didn't mean to be a downer at all -- I think the work is growing by leaps and bounds, quality wise, largely I think because Dave came in like gangbusters and really kicked shit into a high gear -- btw you rock, Dave; it's been a joy to come in and read the latest digs. I lament that I haven't been adding much text lately, but hey, I did add a movie. 8) Nonetheless, soon I'd like to spend some time fleshing out the real stuff on the Tub, (such as Phillip Dru, The Murdered Holmes Scholar Dude, Dick Fosbury, etc, just to mix it up a little more in that regard.
Also, I wonder if we couldn't do with a little forum of some sort? To replace this page -- which has gotten rather unwieldy? Might make it easier for folks to leave comments and the like? Perhaps usingthis software (http://www.phpbb.com/). That's great forum software --example here (http://www.organicflash.com/forum/).
- Payne 07:36, 27 Apr 2005 (EDT): um, not to change the subj., but does anyone know how to get a baby to sleep? good god - i feel like part of some vicious sleep deprivation study... anyhow - yeah, it's a pt. well made on the image chillin' & cullin' - after all, "the truth can be made pure by removal". (& i'm pretty sure that my stabs at the zodiac & dc pentagram images make it pretty clear i'm no graphics whiz kid :) so i hope that my posting (images & text) will be edited, knocked around, hacked up, bandied about, hob-knobed, and spit back out - it's the collaboration that keeps this alive, fun, & real, after all. two more notes: 1. i'd love to have some sort of forum available (like you mentioned above, tim) - i think we're trying to push this page in directions it wasn't meant to go. 2. um, shit i forgot what 2 was. oh yeah (minutes later) - as long as i'm doling out compliments to you, tim, i like the idea of the stub cat. makes it easier to find stuff that others want to see worked on.
- Payne 08:35, 27 Apr 2005 (EDT): So i looked "culling" in the dictionary, and it's a weird sort of word. it means to selectively remove, but it also means to gather. in that vein, i've harvested a few images that i do like, but i haven't found good use for them. i'm going to post them on Unused Images (i know that there's an unused "image link" under "special pages" in the "tool box", but i'm hoping this will be a bit more dynamic by actually showing some cool images that we want to use.)
Pigs Don't Sweat
I put up our first use of Flash in the site, a link to a movie Sven and I did this weekend. The structure of it all will probably change, the style I mean, but I justed to get it up and in real quick. I'll pretty up in the near future, particularly as we'll be doing more of this kind of thing in the future.
The basic thinking, however, is the little flash doohickey with some motion, you click that and it takes out of TubSpace and into VaporSpace, where the actual file is hosted on a page of it's own. This is the best way I could think of doing it for the moment. I'd like to eventually have the file load into a Tub page, for instance in this instance it would something like Fun Facts Media: Pigs. The structure would probably have a big table in the middle, all black, which would hold the file. And then the bottom would the usually tubbinations, see also etc. Thoughts?
- Good Lord & hot damn altogether: this is wonderful... it really explodes the possibilities... By the way, sven, yr performance is kinda creepy to watch while eating breakfast...
- Jesus Dave, that Donut stuff is damn clever! You the man! I like the proposal for the video, load right into the pig page if possible, or a kind of popup? But as is, not too shabby, because it doesn't leave the pig page but opens an entirely new window. On the other hand, unless you know the video is there, you don't know it's there. We need to pop in a "click here" text of some sort. But bollocks. Very cool shit. Ditto Dave's comments on the creepy factor. :) "Pigs are smart." hoho
Funny that Adkins definition no 2 for owl was about a coin because I had chosen to upload a pic of a coin with an owl on it but was interrupted(at work today). Feel free to override any pics for I am using a shitty freeware graphic-software so am not making art as much as doing grunt table formating work et al. Thank for your patience. Vogeler
- we are all online at the moment, go here and sign on: http://www.100megsfree4.com/stimso/psh.htm ...we can chat real time
- Any way we can get Vogeler's Fun Facts with a different font, or a logo os some sorts? Something zippier? I love the reproduction Zodiac placemat, but was wondering what you all though about Tim roughing it up a bit, like he did with the Accidental Action calling card. adkins.
- Not to step on Payne's toes, but I was already planning on making one along the lines of those Zodiac placemats you find in Chinese restuarants. I might even just scan one in as start and collage it up. As for the fun facts, yes, we're gonna do a photoshoot for it eventually, some graphic goohawin'.
- Wouldn't be taken as on a step on the toes here. I'm excited to see what you come up with. - Payne 19:54, 22 Apr 2005 (EDT)
I was chatting with Sven about the site the other day and it was suggested that a basic table be put forth that we can copy and paste from when creating new entries. It is is here -- BasicTable. This is your essential guide to creating new personages. Just copy the code and slug into the blank spaces and either delete reference to the picture or replace it. Golden! I'd also kinda like to see this format on other entries too, if they are fat enough. Thoughts?
- Adkins: Agreed. Especially useful would be a definitive format for glossary entries. I think they're more or less consistent but not entirely. Also good would be a Style Guide which addresses all these questions in one place: ie See Also uses bullets, Desiderata uses a colon, how to make tables etc. We toyed around with this way back but went at it piecemeal. If we can put all this info onto one page "Strunk and White" style we'd be flying high. Rock on.
- Payne: Likewise agreed. I dig the basic table. I'd set up the same thing on my desktop. I expanded some of the subheadings so that we can hammer out how to format multiple Known Works, etc.
- Still Payne: Perhaps instead of the Basic Table, it should be the Basic Personage Entry? Then we could set up others, like a Basic Glossary Entry. If we wanted to go nuts, we could actually set these up so that they show the code (rather than showing what the basic page looks like). That way we could just copy the code straight out of the page instead of going to Edit the page each time. (I'll try to create an example.) Plus, this would let us put these pages into their own category (e.g., Category:Style Guide). Just some thoughts.
- Still, still Payne: When thinking about a style guide - worth a quick look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style
This Night's Poetry Award Goes To
Meat sometimes appears on the horizon -- a hundred years apart!
Ok, I was hoping to scare you guys away, and it didn't work! Regardless, the upgrade to version 1.4 is a complete success -- in so far as I can tell. You may have run into some problems if you were trying to edit during the process and I hope no work was lost.
That said, I'm not sure how the new features are doing -- an image gallery ( i think it will only deal with images uploaded from this point on) and the timeline. Gonna go fiddle with that right now to see if it's working. So, all is keen!
Tub on you delicious bastards!
- Bah! Seems to be some residual weirdness. Looking into it.
- hey t - look forward to checking out the new features! i hopped on in the middle of some upgrading weirdness & had some weird shit happen. wanna take my ip address off the two 4/16 postings when you get a chance? - d
- HOT DAMN! only been on for a minute or two, but searches work like the Unseen Hand - may not sound like much to get excited about, but it's gonna make it way easier to get around, cross-reference, "fact check", etc.
Getting Fucking Real
You are all Poob, sick fucking shit ass Poob. I maintain this site in the way Associationalists have always maintained Zoos -- looky here, at the fucking sick shit these fuckers are up to -- ha!i'm gonna fucking puke. Let me go. Now. Move quietly. Poob Death is your game, and I'm only playing so much as I'm not. Get it?
Poob Out, bitches. And don't complain when the fucking glove comes down.
- What the hell's going on? I don't have to log on anymore? New logo? No more checkbox for minor changes? - payne
Fun Facts Rock
That is some geloscopic medicinating that is a typical horror shot of me fun factin' n such
I'm skeptical of this, frankly. It doesn't seem this is worked out to the extent where we can start plopping folks into slots. I'd rather see it develop more organically. My two cents. Also, I'd like to be careful about the naming of categories -- such as to avoid a category name like "Places", which to me is rather shabby. Once we start pluggin things into a category, there isn't really a way back out, right?
- On further thought, the trend in my thinking still lay essentially in improving the text. Further organization without this feat seems unproductive -- but then I could be wrong and that's why it's a collaborative gig here.
Also, I apologize for not upgrading the wiki this weekend. I will the next, I promise!
- Organization is perhaps not a priority. I see a lot of slow additions here and there, as if evidence is really being uncovered, which gives us an unpredictable beast. I'm not so amped on subcategories, really. Just an idea that as you say, at this point might be counterproductive. Also, regarding the Places category, that too is something that's probably worth shifting back into the glossary. Or both. Places, bah. Weird shit that crops up after a few bruces. Anyway, I'm not going to make any additions in that regard, cats, etc. Just going to focus on text.
Am I to assume noone else wants to kick in on the very shabby Poob voice overlay script (http://plastictub.vaporslave.com/index.php/Talk:Poob_Culture)?
- still....not there yet (for me to enter into that), but keep on by all means. so far so good i think.
- looks like a good start. did you have a some specific footage in mind? that might spark some more creativity for scripting. also - i'm going to upload a few posters that we could present as advertisements for a free adult ed. class for "The Poob Amoung Us." i'm not sure how to best work these into the sight, but i think they're great images.
I'd really rather not start putting Known Works into the Desiderata area -- mainly because it's needless work to change all the pages to that format, as having it slipshod wouldn't do! And besides, an empty desiderata area simply means it's a work in progress. Shifting around work already accomplished won't fill gaps, only move gaps around. Pictures need to be placed in that area, also, perhaps mulitple pictures, sound files, whatever we come up with in the future.
A Note on Flash
Ok, Alden got the flash working and it looks like it's good to go; however, it's tentative -- I wouldn't go fiddlin' with it just yet. I'm not sure how compatible it's going to be with the new build, with our other formatting, etc. I'm gonna run it through the mill and see how it reacts later tonight. But think of the potential! We can now have inline video, animation and sound! Rock!
- I have an idea for the logo. Can we Flash animate it so that the text rotates clockwise, the hands counter, and the chaos arrows once-again clockwise. Perhaps when the main page is loaded it could do this, maybe haltingly, switching directions, before settling into where it is. Simple and lively, but is it too corny?
A brief word
Tim, I agree with everything here. Tightening up in all regards, for organizations, loose ends etc. I'd definitely like to take a crack at the timeline. This has always been tough for me, because I flip back and forth thru pages to keep things consistent, and its pretty inefficient. I would add that if you do add new works or expereinces for a major character, check their bios first....this is pretty much for Dave, though, so maybe I can shoot you a quick list of the major players. Just to orient you a bit. Tim, regarding Cappy, he's okay. Some time back I made a Cappy and Copernicus split. Copernicus is the Kook Kontemporary, and Cappy is a recent fellow. All part of the ancestral shipping feud plot I've been injecting into the story. (see Xenophon Aliokrate). Cappy is an descendant.
Also, I want to subdivide the personages section into something, perhaps: Members, Antagonists and Non-Participants. Ideas on the nomenclature or the number of subcats?
- Subdividing the personages is an excellent idea, tho disagreeably hard to realize. It'd be a good idea to start with the fewest number of subcats, and then work out from there. One problem is that several people have a shakey affiliation (Balthazar Buehb, Creatine Panderbox, et.al.). Could the cats be somewhat nonsensical? Like White, Gray, Black? Here, There, Somewhere? The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly? God-fearin', Big Nosed, and Lesbos? Dammit - this is hard...
- I'm down for a triad of subcats: 1. AA'ers and Fellow Travellers (?), 2. Antagonists and 3. Clampers. The first would be fairly straightforward. Panderbox would be an AA'er, despite her lapse and treachery. Buehb migh fall into the antagonist's cat but always with a kind of caveat. Clampers would involve all scholars and commentators not directly associated with the movement. Harder to peg are the historical personages, which, come to think of it, might be another subcat (4.) Others may seem pertinent but I think four cats are enuff to classify the characters in such a way as to be immediately identifiable to a reader, like, oh: this is an enemy. I see the coonnection here. etc. Further subtlety would be given by the text itself. Of course, the names and number of subcats, including the actually sense of the division is not solid and you may have some better ideas. This is a tentative proposal. Without being too complicated, we can at least at a mareker of sorts. Friend. Foe. Hangers On.
As for publicity, I think yr right, Tim. It will come and really, the later the better. We have some work to do. The front page....I dunno. I saw you were working with an image of the day on the sandbox history, tim? I was all for propmotion at one time but we can wait some more.
The societies will get worked out with a timeline, I hope. I have an idea of how they relate, and have been trying to link things thru family lineage or student teacher lineage or any manner of things. Obviously we have antagonistic societies dating back to the Renaissance, active in Italy and France mostly, before ending up in the USA. Morris was involved in some way, with a criminal band....the criminal band finds itself expressed with Koose, Tommy the Bookie, etc. Is it possibly an offshoot of that earlier gang? Certainly, the AA enemies have links to these families, sometimes on an unexpected side. Finally, these dueling groups have religious practices hostile to one another. The Fancy Gloves, Cancerous Mask, AA, Morris Gang, Italian Composer, Choco axis is locked in combat with the Pinque, Gnomes, Aliokrate empire, Mormo axis. Something like that. I'd like to see how that plays out.
Anyway, them's a few thoughts.
As always, I'm proud of this project and glad to be having such fun with you fine fellows.
Flash stuff looks great, Tim. This is exciting because i caught a little 16mm footage of a art critic (from the early 70's no less!) just before the film melts- awesome 40 seconds. prob is I have too many torrents open last night to due nessecary upgrade's to my video capture program. AS soon As i get home -As soon as I get home ...
- First of all, hell yeah, welcome on board Dave -- I've been meaning to reply to your email, but I'm just lazy fucker. As it it, I couldnt' more happy to have you here in the Tub, particularly given that you very apparently have a talent for it; your entries have been awesome. I will further Adkin's advice by saying again, hell yeah, do some proofing of the material, we need it, and by all means keep adding whatever fits your fancy. His advice in this matter is indisputable -- I will add, however, that attention to structure is slack around these parts and any attention to give thusly will no doubt improve the whole.
- Secondly, as updating for the timeline, yes, I will do this soon. I want to say this weekend, but I'm not sure -- One never knows the problems that can occur with an upgrade, but this build seems to have generated little chatter, so that's a good sign. Other features, such as a picture gallery function, have been added to the latest build as well. Anyone interested in what's going on with wiki, or learning it's intracies, simply click on their logo at the bottom right of every Tub page. For instance, we should start using templates, sub categories and all manner of organizational bits and bobs. Read Wikepedia, see what they do -- we can ape alot of that shit to good advantage.
- Thirdly, as to promotion. I don't think a show of physical artifacts is in order, at least not at this time. What would we show? More interesting, is beefing up the site's appearance, particularly the front page, continuing efforts to tie it all together, etc -- these things are out greatest promotional effort, IMO. The Tub isn't going anywhere, we have time to keep whacking at it, I'm convinced attention will come eventually. That said, I've been hesitant to start any kind of campaign to gain attention because I felt the site wasn't really ready -- perhaps I'm wrong in this regard. I have a problem with the main page, but not entirely certain what to do about it. I guess I prefer working on the content and presentation regardless of whether anyone else is reading our shit; process and product hopelessly comingled in a kissy face punch-up.
- We need a timeline, yes, but more important is keeping shit straight. For instance, Cappy can't have produced something in 1966. He was contemporary with Kook, Slippers, Guvenor. The people dont' fit together at all -- everyone of importance, the core members, have all migrated up about thirty years -- they were early proto-modernists, now they are 50's-60's jokers. Some even produce work today! That strikes me as inconsistent. Adid and the early crew surely would have fallen silent by the mid 80's? It begs the question, perhaps in many entries speaking of Addisson, they speak of his son or something. At any rate, the chronology is whacked, and yes perhaps the timeline will fix that.
- There are many unanswered questions, unresolved issues. I'd like to see those tackled. What the fucks up with all the societies, for instance? The unrelateed murders, conspiracies, et al? I guess it seems to me to have moved beyond Associationalism, or rather, Associationalism revealed itself as part of something much much larger. What is that something? Etc.
Anyhoo, you've got a fire under our britches, Dave, and that's a fine thing. You even dragged Sven back into the recent changes page, which unto itself is cool. The Tub gets better every time one of you touches it, so make with the touchin'!
Ah lastly, was talking with a friend at work, Scott Alden, and I think he may just help me to get flash enabled on the site -- which would rock so hard I can't even begin to describe.
Right on Welcome Aboard
Wow I had no idea i was away as long as I was, Sorry my tubskills are extremely rusty. Welcome aboard Payne, what an exciting time. the contenet should emass at a quicker rate
Thanks, man - this stuff's like crack. i've found my mind wandering to it while biking into work, watching the sopranos, etc., etc...
Payne, I'm glad yr aboard. You've slid right in there with some good stuff, yout caught on quickly. Sven! Good to have you back my man. It hasn't been the same without you. Tim, rock on!
A note on the style, the frontpage, the story....
Zander says that a good whisky is maron clear, beau aux lèvres - and that is what we shall seek.
- As a note on imagery and copyright, I found this today, which is sweet, sweet: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Here's a good source for early images (maps, photos, drawings, paintings, etc.) relevant to early american history. there's an good series of revolution era maps, for example. it's a bit tough to navigate and find stuff, but there's gold in them thar hills. virtually all the older stuff (e.g., pre 1922) is free from copyright restrictions (the site has more detail on that): http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html
- here are a couple goodies i found on the site listed above:
- http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?rbpebib:4:./temp/~ammem_It0Y:: (Counterfeit national bank notes warning info, probably passed to banks... December 1898)
- http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/wpaposters/wpahome.html (posters WPA ~ 1936-43; i'm uploading a few for the adult ed "The Poob Amoung Us" course)
- I'm gonna try my hand at a timeline based upon people first, slugging in important events next, perhaps with some other historical markers thrown in. Can this be done in columns?
- Timeline functionality is being worked out in the latest builds of Mediawiki . . . presently, it's an extension and looks like the examples here: Timelines (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EasyTimeline). Is that what you have in mind?
- This is as good a place to start as any. I'm gonna fool about here: AA Timeline
- Update: Not as simple as it seems. I cut the code directly from the sample and tooled about but it didn't create a timeline graphically. ?
- I think I have to upgrade the software for this feature to work. I just rolled out of bed, and I have the upgrade, but I want to back everything up and keep it cool. I'll likely upgrade later today or tomorrow, and that timeline you created should automagically work.
- Update: Not as simple as it seems. I cut the code directly from the sample and tooled about but it didn't create a timeline graphically. ?
- Secondly, can we edit the "frame" so that there's an email contact or a link to a contact page? I'm wondering if we've had visitors who haven't edited but might have something to say to us.
- By frame, do you mean the sidebar to the left? I could add it there, perhaps, but maybe we can just sprinkle it in the about section? contact links could be placed on the front page as well. But what would you have, all of our email addresses?
- Yeah, I was thinking sidebar, but the about section is smarter. I thought we could include all or just one email addy. I'll put mine on the about page....
any progress on updating to allow the timelines? (i can't figure out if these posts are date-stamped, so i'm not sure if the discussions above were yesterday or last year...) i made a minimal effort to dink around w/ the code, but it still seems unworking. this could be a really cool feature, tho hard to keep updated. it'd also be nice to have some sort of geographic display/organizer - not sure if such a thing exists.
desderita looks way cool how does it look with several entries? I am learning how to get images up. hurray. hows about my Photoshop job, shabby? yes. mission accomplished ? yes sir what next? you tell me. keep spermentin' ya hear
- i think that image needs to be fixed
- yeah it i am a bit rusty if i was ever oxegenated anyway. that face gen stuff is fun. I was really just trying to learn the code stuff. that code to the Desderita sidebar stuff looks pretty meaty. did you find it difficult?
- I assume you're being sarcastic. At any rate, I did the Addisson entry as well. I rather like how it cuts up the page, particularly if the desiderata section was fat. It only requires putting in an html table. On further thought, it would be amusing to use this desiderata section to have a small portrait of every guy at the top, like the sidebar functioned like the back of a sports trading card.
- Adkins here. Yeah. I like the Desiderata sidebar. It gives the pages a better look. More dynamic. (yow, I'm an art critic all of a sudden) Anyway, adding a pic could be cool too; I'd like to see it tested out, because it looks pretty cool now as well. Trading Cards? Hell yeah....love to see that idea. Get a pack of five in a foil wrapper! With gum. That is totally do-able.
The recent spate of image-adding is really cool, btw. Nice work chums. Any final words on how to categorize pubs and other media? I'm game for anything, really, as long as we get to it.
As you know, we do a lot of cruising for sp errors etc and I've seen a few regulars we should keep an eye on before hitting the edit button. Not to be a dick but just for future reference and we'll save ourselves some time. Desiderata. Look at the top of this section and you'll see what I mean. Thier should be "their." Immediatly retains the e: "Immediately." Thurstenwell could always be an alternate spelling, but on his page he's "Thurstunwell." Just some things I've corrected a few times. Hope I'm not out of line.
- Tim here. I don't think you're out of line with the spelling stuff, btw, I'll keep that in mind. Their has always been my achilles belly. As for the category question on pubs, I'm ok with Extant Works, though I'll probably never give up my fondness for the more plodding Works in Extent -- slug in whichever you think is best, I'm cool with that. The imagery is so-so -- I must confess to being the authoritarian editor in this matter, I don't think the last few can stand. Using AP photos is a no-no, and the pshops for Tommy and Nevid are somewhat lackadaise and need eventually to be replaced. What do you think, Adkins, of the timeline and the eventual lockdown of material? Also, are you indeed going to put up the Greenbook?
- Whew. I didn't want to come across self-righteous on the spelling thing. Mormo knows I'm just as guilty. Also, I'll start on "Extant Works" then. Yeah, those Nevid and Tommy photos need some work. They're funny as hell but too obviously...false. :) Some obsfucation may do them good. I'm more stoked to see more images than the images themselves, but you're right to be authoritarian: Quality is imperative. I cut the AP photo. I'm glad you called that out because I had to check the AP site and was pretty sure I was in the wrong. Too bad cuz that photo is awesome. Perhaps we can find some public domain stuff? The timeline would be a very useful tool, whether in text or (better) graphic form. It would help us to square all dates and to help us link personages. For example, Attucks needs to be linked to Morris and Kook, but could also be involved with Slippers and Biberoni. By clumping the names together we could have easy access to all in their proper time for making accurate Associations date-wise and also flesh out relationships vis a vis common events and historical context. I recoil timidly but really it wouldn't be so tough. How do you think a timeline would work best?
Greenbook will be up, but it's still got a good chunk in analog form to be recorded. Granted, your idea of scanning pages would be best but a) that's a long haul and b) I don't know if I want to see my sub-mental scrawl on display to the world. hehe. Overall, though, what's your take on the overall development of the Tub? I'm pretty much stoked but feel a need to "infill" some of the basic personages, especially to give them their due. There are now more post-Tub personages than Primer personages, who I'd like to see stand out more, those who would qualify as members of the AA in the terms you described a bit ago. There are also a host of concepts and ideas which need to be explained once and for all. I really don't feel I'm the best qulified and would like to see you and Sven tackle that. I feel more comfortable with anecdotes and biography. But above and beyond I'm pretty proud of this here Tub. I'm guaranteed chuckles and even guffaws each time I read the new stuff. (pats self on back)
- I rather like the Tub's current incarnation with but a few reservations -- the main being what you've mentioned, the paucity of information in regards to the Core Membership. That and the lack of depth; the jokiness is fine and good, but it loses itself in whimsy, there is no effective counterpoint. If The Tub continues on it's present course without deviation, it'll be little more than a collection of interlinked gags and rim-shots. So then, while I like what's happened tremendously, in my opinion a shift is needed. With this is in mind I propose the following:
- Emphasis on formatting, with an eye towards greater complexity and increased intercontexuality. For instance, this would include little asides, "info-slugs", a sidebar, increased pictoral content and the homogeneity of the current subsection structures, etc.
- A lock-down on new entries, or in the very least, a severe restriction on such. This would be in order to focus more attention on the short, underveloped entries. This needn't preclude whimsical additions, however -- one simply works new material into existing structures, the trick is find the wiggle room for insertion. This could be perfect for a Desiderata sidebar, like the indian bandit guy could easily be a sidebar on Ritual Shoplifting, Gnomes, etc.
- Stylistic consistency -- main sections shouldn't read like Soluble Fish or Et Tu, Babe -- that sort of gaffing belongs in subsections. (I want to amend this thought -- most entries are perfect in this sense. My point is only the keep in the mind the encyopledist's hand.)
- The front page needs to be entirely reworked -- it should be a proper splash page, in the marvel comic sense, rather that a staid listing.
Hello Sven here. I just tubbed in tonight and have to say yuor discussion will save me lots of unnecasary questions. I have to say the main reason i added the last few people was because we had no one whos nwme bgan with an L so i kinda did it for alpabetation's sake. Nuff Said bout my PShop but i was really just funnin and learnin. I did not expect them to last anyway. phone wont stop be bac
What do you guys think of this formatting?
- Hoho, point taken! I don't think the quote is entirely incorrect, because in the Tub we speak of AA ideas and personalities, divisions, etc; but never the The AA itself as a formal organization. It's not, for example, in the "groups" category (yet). Like we could say Reticent 27 is the official mouthpiece of the AA, but isn't it the magazine itself which is an organization, as well as the various clubs, etc., but no real center? ....I concede however, that certain elements become meaningless without the assumption of a core, such as the conferences. I propose a more detailed development of this history. At what point was the AA in fact formed after Adid and Addisson began to promulgate their ideas in magazine form? The Tub is so far silent on this point, which ceases to be unusual if you view the AA in the light presented in the quote.
To be honest though, I hesitated to add that bit and wasn't really happy with the way it came out, so again, your point is well-taken and the paragraph needs to be either removed, modified or worked into an amusing debate. One academic camp goes one way, another goes another....
- Yes, I'm with you on this one. Some knuckin' down must occur on this matter. A timeline should also be created. We can do nothing but plod on, I suppose, though we could make a more concerted effort to flesh out the fundamental concepts. I have a hard time elucidating them in print, however, despite my ability to vocalize it. It's hard work. 8)
found this on the AA entry:
- Although we speak of "The AA" and "AA'ers," it should be noted that "AA" has never represented any formally chartered or established group as such, but a group of individuals and groups so-chartered, bound together in a loose affiliation based on shared ideals and cameraderie.
This is entirely incorrect. Without proper understanding of this point, the tub seems worhtless. There is and was a group of affiliated members who are the AA. Without such, every reference point for the tubopedia is dries up and renders all else pap-less and shite.
as per the below, no, no category, but it would be great to add a list of phrases for a style guide
- it is said that
- it is thought that
Yeah, no category necessary but it would be amusing to extrapolate on the "stock-phrases" in the Style Guide we need to create....
I just wrote this i wonder if phrases like "a kind of" could somehow be tagged -- and thought would be it be:
to link such word-jinks to a category? Something like Turns of Phrase? In this category we could put stuff like:
- researchers say
- studies show
- though thought otherwise
- by means of
- moving in tandem with
- understood as
- Tim, I could vote on that if we modified it to Extant Works or Works Extant. Then, for the sake of accuracy, we could pop in a subcat of Lost Works when appropriate. What do you think?
- Works Extant, eh? I confess to preferring the "in" portion -- it strikes me as more deliberately academic. Of the two you suggest, Extant Works is the better.
Works in Extentgets my vote on further thinking. i printed out all the personage pages before i left work and they look rather academic, and bad ass although someof the lighter entries look a little unbalanced, the more robust pages look incredible and the format really makes them look cohesive and dare i say printready?.There was a 65 pages and they look like they were won to be a fatass manuscript. I promptly put them in a folder and hid them. And I am guilty of fudgin the categories crap and thought that i undid it properly but i have too many excuses already.
A few things on category creation. Please don't create a category page that is essentially a content page -- this defeats the purpose. If a category is specific enough to be a single entry it shouldn't be a category. I have changed feast day into feasts and high days and moved it to an appropriate subcategory within ritual and ceremony.
One creates a subcategory by simply putting a link to it on the page in question. For instance, putting category:foibles' onto a page on editing. This category of course would not exist as such -- at least until you click on the lick at the bottom. This would bring you to the actual categor:foibles page. It is on this page where you would slug in the category in which you want to place foibles. - -for instance, category:Follies. thus, when you go to the Follies category page, you would see foibles as a subcategory.
On the subject of Publications, I'm still leaning towards Works in Extent -- because it has a the academicist tone I like in the encylcopedic elements of the tub and it covers all art work, not only written material. I'm sure there's a better suggestion. Known Works doesn't do it for me, primarily because we're already using it as a subsection title.
A few more suggestions:
What do guys think about renaming the category Publications as Works in Extent, or something thereof, perhaps even, as Vogeler suggests -- bibliography?
The problem, I think, arises from categorizing songs, ballet and film in publications. Thoughts? The category is small enough now to go in an change shit withoug much fuss -- so we should settle on it.
- Yeah, I held off on adding publications to many things because of that reason. I suggest "Known Works" or better, Sven's suggestion. "Bibliography" seems the logical choice, as it is all all-encompassing and accurate.
- I think that we should go with "Extrapolation" as a subhead.
- Finally, take a look at watermelon, where I quoted a news article. This doesn't seem to be "Usage" as i've labelled it, but something else; What do you think of creating a "Sightings" subhead where we can stick quotes from the "real world" which use the word in an amusing or startling context?
And fucking-a(a)! What a flurry you've all been up to. Great stuff!
- Coolio on the extrapolation. But isn't bibliography specific to books? Or . .?
- Shit, you're right! Oops, my goof. "Works Cited" is a bit much...."Archives"...."Mediatheque and Library"...."Library"? "Known Works" Maybe subcategories is it: Sound Recordings, Film and Video, Books, Magazines, Journals, Newspapers.....no, too many possibilities...what about "Publications & Multimedia"? Library might be good....Media Lab? It's actually a rather tough nut to crack....
What do you guys think of the Extrapolation subsection? I rather like it as a method of furthering comment outside the main thrust of an entry, particularly in the case of the glossary. Now, it is a mix of:
(which is redundant)
Should we go with the latter or dream up another term for this substructure?
I'm gonna create a glossary category and begin popping stuff in. It's a rather extensive list; I'm starting at the top....
- UPDATE: OK, all items are in the glossary category from the original page. Pretty much all the New pages need definitions. They only exist now because they have the category link.
Ok so all the personages should be properly categorized at this point. Next up should probably be works? Any thoughts?
- I would say yes to that. We've already got a publications category started. Also, a groups category includiong the leagues, scouts etc. Maybe definitions? After groups and works I'm not sure what categories to create....
Style guide suggestions
- I created the category "publications" which may need to be similarly subdivided by groups pro and anti aa or into journals, books, newspapers etc.
- Query: Are subsections to be demarcated with one line or two?
Ok, gang, I've added a category called personages. The code for this, to be added at the top of the page, is [[Category:Personages]]
This will slug it into a neat little package, automatically alphabetized. This means we don't have to manually add jack shit when we dream up some new entity. Of course, this goes for all categorizations to be made in the future. So, all personages need this code added to them and then we can just link off the front page directly to the category.
- I would add, however, that a subcategory is probably needed -- such as Second Generation, or , Latter-Day -- or in the very least, we could break them down as Poobs, Clampes, Chimps, Honeybees, Accidentalists, etc etc etc. Thoughts?
Also, I've started doing the See Also section like this:
Additionally, I've been doing Desiderata with a slight indent, accomplished like so:
- He has sandwiches in all of pockets.
The code for which is just a colon and a space.
1. I think all new pages should include at least one link to an active page, i.e. no dead ends. I think it improves flow and causes us to stretch, thus fleshing out the story with anecdotes, etc. An entry on "organ grinders" would inevitable involve Flintrock's riotous "lost-weekend" in Mexico City, 1955, thus serving both to facilitate the flow of traffic with a relevant link and create yet another bit of Flintrock's history. He was there to study Mayan petroglyphs and fuck for a dollar and a ten cent beer etc. He met Burroughs in a Bar and....
- I totally agree and have been trying to do this but one can always go further.
2. I wonder if we shouldn't comingle the quotes and the glossary sections? They seem to overlap a great deal and it would make for fatter, more dense reading. It's a bloaty category to be separate anyway.
3. I agree. Bring the quotes and glossary section together and create a "Works" section with a list of all the texts from films, peoms, plays etc.
Discussion relating to Plastic Tub development.
- Ok, the pre tag won't let you do italics or bold, etc. So I did Stimes: A Remembrance Based On Association, Not Truth, Thus True.
with a different kind of format. Perhaps the pre tag should be dropped. (doh!) Formatting poetry in wiki is pain in the ass.
- Ok, I put up a text tonight using the _pre_ tag. Dreams of a False Nose -- you can look at how it was done, easy peasy. The pre tag gives it a dashed box, typewriter font and preserves the original formatting. Cut and paste, basically. I suggest we do all our 'known works' like this.
- Slight? You talkin' bout the style guide thing or did I miss sumpin? Naw man, tis well rec'd on my end (see vapslav post for further details)
- Hey gang, not intending to slight anyone if that is how it came off with my (looking for word..) Stupid and ill-prepared Post to Vaporslave. I cannot thank you guys enough for all the spelling corrections and format,link repair. Not to mention the inspiration. That initial blast was exhausting and I feel I may need to fuel up again lest i blow a block and bring down a public mailbox(W.A.S.T.E.). Cant wait to discuss the places this thing should go. count me in.