Re: So, You Want To Make Text Art?

JRO wrote:
> Veronica Karlsson wrote:
> > For people with American keyboards, *maybe*. For people with, e.g.
> > Swedish keyboards it was Bad Advice.
> 
>  "Qurblx, her brainpan nodule
>   does not seem to contain the
>   simple information about what
>      ASCII stands for."

"what ASCII stands for" is not the same thing as "what kinds of
keyboards people reading your tutorials are using". There may be some
similarity between the two for people using American keyboards, but
that's no excuse for confusing people who happen to come from other
countries than you.

> > Most Swedish computer users have Swedish keyboards. And I would expect
> > most Finnish computer users to have Finnish keyboards, and most Spanish
> > computer users to have Spanish keyboards, etc. The world *is* bigger
> > than just northern America.
> 
>  "Yes, I suppose there is more than
>     just North America..."
>             /   "But since more computers are there, than
>            /     everywhere else in the world, and since
>           /       most ALL of them use ASCII,

Please, show some statistics. So far all you've done is hint that "90%"
(or is it "99%"?) and now "most ALL" of the computer users in the world
use American keyboards.

>  "You know, it is just simple
> fact that most computers "speak"
>  English. Air traffic controllers
>  do, too. Most people who speak
> the wide variety of other languages
>  adapt to this fact, quite well...
> Even if they are "New" (to ascii)."

Yes, sure, but what kinds of keyboards do they use? Don't you think
somebody in Spain wants to write in Spanish to his friends? To do that
comfortably he needs a Spanish keyboard:

http://www.fingertipsoft.com/kbd/spanish.gif

which contains such characters as   ����

Do you think he's going to get a new keyboard (which is inferior to his
needs) before reading your tutorial?

> > Here's that "90%" figure I mentioned in that other reply. Again: Is it
> > based on fact or did you invent it? (the fact that it's "90" here and
> > "99" in the other version would suggest that you invented it)
> 
>              "So what?"
>         \__/ /               \__/
>         (__)                 (__)
>      (\//()\\/)            .//()\\ \
>       \/\__/\/             .\\__// "Yes, it is a reasonably
>         ||||                 ||||   accurate figure, any way
>         ||||                 ||||     you look at it."
>        (_)(_)               (_)(_)

If you mention a statistic, either you can back it up or people can
assume that you are simply lying and inventing numbers that suit your
purposes. How can you, or anybody else, know it's accurate if it can't
be checked? Please, cite your references regarding this "statistic".


> >
> > IMO a plain list of the "good" characters is quite simple.
> >
> 
> "`1234567890-=~!@#$%^&*()_+qwertyui
>  op[]QWERTYUIOP{}asdfghjkl;'ASDFGH
>   JKL:"zxcvbnm,./\ZXCVBNM<>?|...."
>       /
>      \__/              \__/
>      (__)              (__)
>    .//()\\           .//()\\ \
>    .\\__//           .\\__//"It IS accurate, but it
>      ||||              ||||  doesn't quite "sing"..."
>      ||||              ||||
>     (_)(_)            (_)(_)

Bob Allison's FAQ has something quite similar to that, yes.
Unfortunately, the wording in that FAQ is "Standard ASCII art is made
with characters, such as:". I read the "such as" part as a suggestion
that there may be other suitable characters as well.

> > That's not a good excuse for giving bad advice, especially not since the
> > subject is quite simple anyway. You don't need any simplification. You
> > accused the FAQ of "looking down on" people. Well, you treat people as
> > if they're not intelligent enough to read a simple list...
> 
>   "No, the Boss treats people
>    as if they are intelligent
>    enough to wish for the
>    simplest, most entertaining
>    answers he can give them,
>    realizing that both children
>    and grown-ups are bored by
>    unnecessary, intensive study
>    of something that is supposed
>    to be a fun hobby."

I definitely agree that simple answers are better than complicated ones.
I do not agree that an entertaining but incorrect answer is better than
one that is boring but correct.

> > I still don't see the need for something quite simple, and yes, a little
> > "techy", to be *entertaining*.
> 
>             "Snrkk...No surprise, there. Veronica thinks it's a blast,
>              to read source code on web pages, and write total strangers
>              about the mistakes on their personal home pages. For most
>                  Earthlings, such a diversion is just not what they
>                      would call "a good time"."

If I have trouble reading a page that I find interesting (or think I
might find interesting if I didn't have trouble reading it) I may
sometimes do that. That's not what you're talking about here though. The
rest of the group don't know about the discussion between you and me
where I had found a problem on one of your pages and wrote to you and
told you how to fix it (just as I had previously told you about all
sorts of HTML related things). At that time I still thought of you a bit
the way a teacher thinks about a student (since I did get you started
with that site). The result? Page after page of insults from you!

You keep referring to anonymous people you have talked to in email. I'll
do the same and mention that at least one person (right now I can think
of two specific people, both of which like to draw very tiny pictures)
has told me to stop responding to you - because discussing things with
you is just one big waste of time. After the HTML error incident I
realised that they are right, and that's why I chose to respond in the
group rather than in email.

> > Good! (I just wonder one thing: How many of the people who read them go
> > on to post pictures containing � or � or � and then get flamed for it?)
> 
>   "If some do, so what?   "Yes, they may get a nice repost or email
>    an easily correctable   from the Boss (or somebody) recommending
>       mistake."           that they avoid the use of extended characters.
>          \                there is NO REASON to flame someone, for that."

And they do, but people tend to run out of patience when they see the
fifteenth-or-so such post from the same person. If that person then goes
back to your tutorial and sees that you say that he is doing the right
thing... Don't you think one possile logical conclusion for a person in
that situation can be that you are right and the people telling him to
do something else are wrong and then ignore the corrections and go on
posting as before?

> > I don't see how ascii art is any less "real" than any other art. The
> > fact that somebody earns money making pictures is no guarantee that he
> > is any better at making pictures than somebody else, who doesn't sell
> > his pictures for money.
> 
>     "No, but when professionals seem to find
>     little use for your methods of "helping"
>     them, but seem to prefer the Boss's, it
>     is an indication that perhaps you should
>     consider adopting better methods."

It seems that these "professionals" are newbies at making ascii art.
What about people who are professionals at something computer related,
do you give their opinions as much weight? (After all, they know
*exactly* what goes on "under the hood" in a computer...)

> > I haven't counted (I've been too busy making pictures of my own).
> 
>  "That is a strange remark, coming
>   from someone who primarily posts
>   acidic "advice", "argumentative
>   critiques", and "flames" to
>    this little newsgroup."     "You should post ascii, instead! The
>        /                      Boss will even send you his tutorials,
>       /                         to help get you started!"

You have high expectations! One fairly large picture a day isn't enough
for you? OK, I'm back to a more normal pace now, but still...

> 
>  "This is NOT an html tutorial,  "And that "opinion" is derrived from
>   and that subject is extraneous  many emails, which say the faqs
>      to this post."             were of no real help. And from the
>          \                       observation of how they are thrown at
>           \                   newcomers (to ascii), who don't come back."

1. Have somebody explain to you what an analogy is and how
   it works.

2. I have sent URLs to the FAQ to many people who have
   stayed, so your claim that showing somebody the FAQ
   is a sure way to drive him off is not true. I have
   received enough "thank you for the information" emails
   to know that my method works very well.


> > And also explanations. The FAQ doesn't just say "do this!". It also
> > makes an effort to explain *why* you should do things a certain way. In
> > the end nobody can stop you from making as big a fool of yourself as you
> > want.
> 
>         "No, that FACK thing tells
>          people "Don't Do This!"...
>        "Don't Do That!"... "We Don't
>            Have Time For You!"

If it says "don't do this" it also explains why. It's warning you not to
do things that are known to cause people to get flamed in this
newsgroup. What's wrong with *that*? Also, you may have an endless
amount of time to spend making name signs for every newbie, but I know I
don't. I also know that most such signs can be made quite easily with
Figlet. What's wrong with saying that straight out in the FAQ?

>  "She is sure mad about      "Yes, and no wonder she never entertains
>   having to ride the bus."    anyone. She inferrs ascii art time is not
>               \                the appropriate time for entertainment."

1. Again, look up that analogy thing.

2. "ascii art time" is certainly an appropriate time for
   entertainment. "Reading up on what is appropriate in a
   specific newsgroup time" is a time for correct
   information. If you can come up with a good way to
   combine the two, fine. If you can't, chose the correct
   but boring version before the entertaining but incorrect
   one.

>                       "The Boss's methods work. Yours don't.

Your suggested method for finding out if a character is good to use for
ascii art (i.e. checking if one can find it on one's keyboard) obviously
does not work for everybody.

> > characters, pictures that are wrapped (Hey! The text part of your
> > tutorial was badly wrapped at the sending end!). 
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The part I underlined here, the words "at the sending end", means that
it was you who did the wrapping, not me.

> 
>                                     "Yes, and maybe she should consider
>                                      getting a real newsreader, that
> will
>                                      read wider posts. But she can't.
> She
>       "More blah, blah, blah..."     has to borrow a computer. Poor
> thing."

The above mess was also wrapped by you, not me (I have corrected it for
you in the rest of the post). Apparently I have more control over my
newsreader than you have over yours.

> > YM "get somebody to applaud you in public".
> 
>  "She seems to think insulting  "Yes, not to mention insulting
>   people in public is the way      the "public", itself."
>        to go."                               /

Yup! Sure is better than email. This way everybody can see the whole
discussion and draw their own conclusions. Do you really think re-using
the same lame pictures again, for the n'th time, and adding little
sarcastic comments everywhere is going to make you look any better?

>     "Once again, she brings up
>      her non-standard keyboard.
>      She thinks the whole world    "She is wrong-headed, is all.
>      should conform to it..."          Let it go, at that..."

No, I mention my Swedish keyboard as an example. There are others, as
you will see if you try to search for e.g. "international keyboards" in
some search engine (I got 818 hits in Alta Vista for that particular
phrase).

> > P.S.: You know none of this is personal, don't you? It's just what
> >       happens, on a newsgroup. This doesn't change the fact that I
> >       simply MUST HAVE YOU! Please come to Sweden, as soon as you
> >       can. My lust for you is unbounded.

Post editing! That's just lame of you.

> 1. Change the AMERICAN STANDARD CODE INFORMATION INTERCHANGE to
>    the SWEDISH STANDARD CODE INFORMATION INTERCHANGE. 

Should be:

1. Realise that not everybody use American keyboards.

> 2. Veronica is very angry over having to ride the bus. We can't
>    blame her. We suggest that taking up contributions to get her
>    a car, might help.

Yes, please!  :-D

(Though, in this case, I didn't take the bus because I "had to" but
because it was very icy on the roads that day. I preferred to let the
professional drivers worry about the road and spent the time reading a
comic book instead. Sounds like an intelligently lazy, simple and
entertaining solution to me...)

> 5. She can't read English, but she can write it.

Speak for yourself Mr "I could care less".


> 8. She is a troll.

Sometimes, in alt.romath, yes. Not in this group though.

>    Newsgroup trolls deny everything,

Not correct. I know some trolls who make a point of not denying
anything.

>    harass newcomers,

I know at least one troll who would not flame newbies, only regulars.
Other than that, much of his opinions were similar to what you have
shown in this thread. He did eventually write his own FAQ.

http://www.hobsonsquare.com/HTMLFAQ.htm

Apparently he did it by copying things from others, but those others
decided to see it as flattery rather than copyright violation.

>    drive posters and readers from a newsgroup,

Some trolls may do this (people like PC or BS who seem to just want to
destroy things), but most that I have seen have had the opposite effect.

>    attempt to embarrass regular posters,

Regular posters can be wrong too. Pointing that out doesn't have to be
an attempt to embarrass anybody.

>    and generally try to dominate a newsgroup and become the center
>    of attention through their bad behavior.

Some trolls do that. Some trolls don't. Some trolls do that, but have a
good reason for it.

A few months ago I would probably have agreed with you about your
opinions about trolls. That was before I learned that there are good
guys among the trolls too. I was wrong. I learned.


-- 
    (,         http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/cgi/asciichat/
    /|__--__                       .                        __--__
    |\ '__                        /|\                        _{ _ 
    `.' / `.,_ _________           |           _________ _,.' (/ `.
    /  ||``._.'             ASCII ART CHAT!             `---'|:||,/
  .'   /|                                                   /|:| \
.'    /\ \         __   __                _                 `/|'\'
 ` `,/ /`,\        \ \ / /__ _ _ ___ _ _ (_)__ __ _         /,'\ \
   .'.'  /|         \ V / -_) '_/ _ \ ' \| / _/ _` |        |\  `.`.
 ,' /   / |          \_/\___|_| \___/_||_|_\__\__,_|        | \   \ `,
- `- -- `-'- -ejm-------------------------------------VK-- -`-' -- -' -