E-mail List Archives
Thread: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
Number of posts in this thread: 30 (In chronological order)
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 4:20AM
Subject: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
No previous message | Next message →
Is anyone going (CSS) naked for the first annual CSS Naked Day tomorrow?
http://naked.dustindiaz.com/
(The idea is to promote Web Standards so it isn't entirely off topic.)
Penny
From: Christian Heilmann
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 4:30AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
> Is anyone going (CSS) naked for the first annual CSS Naked Day tomorrow?
> http://naked.dustindiaz.com/
> (The idea is to promote Web Standards so it isn't entirely off topic.)
I'd say the idea is to promote a lot of web designers as themselves
and an amazing back-patting exercise.
Sorry but
"This is merely to see if you're up to the challenge to put your
website on the line. If you run an e-commerce website, you ought not
participate; this is purely for those with personal blogs or for those
who run publications or&whatever."
Makes it a rather "preaching to the choir" excercise. What point is
there in keeping a lot of web design blogs unstyled to promote the use
of CSS? Who else but bloggers do care? If a lot of webshops or really
massive news portals would do it, that'll be different.
Reminds me of the greyday:
http://web.archive.org/web/19990224113837/www.greyday.org/main.html
How about a "noscript" day, turning off all JavaScript or a "keyboard
awareness day", overruling all click events and only allowing for
keyboard navigation?
From: L
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 5:30AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Penny Roberts wrote:
"Is anyone going (CSS) naked for the first annual CSS Naked Day tomorrow?
http://naked.dustindiaz.com/"
Yup, why not. I'll lose the stylesheets on my personal site for a day. It won't be the most earth shattering move, as a screen reader user it's going to look just the way it always does.
I'm definitely in favour of a little humour being applied to a technical subject. Chris said in another email, it might be preaching to the converted, but it's the converted who usually get vocal and raise awareness with other people.
Regards,
L
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 5:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Christian Heilmann wrote:
> Makes it a rather "preaching to the choir" excercise. What point is
> there in keeping a lot of web design blogs unstyled to promote the use
> of CSS? Who else but bloggers do care? If a lot of webshops or really
> massive news portals would do it, that'll be different.
Accessify have already gone naked: http://www.accessify.com/default.php
Penny
From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 5:50AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
> Accessify have already gone naked: http://www.accessify.com/default.php
Cool. Next time I visit the site its an excuse to say "I didn't recognise you with your clothes on!!" :)
Leonie said
> I'm definitely in favour of a little humour being applied to a technical subject.
I'm all for that, it helps the medicine go down.
Josh
Joshue O Connor
Senior Web Accessibility Consultant
Centre for Inclusive Technology (CFIT)
National Council for the Blind of Ireland
Website: http://www.cfit.ie
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Tel: 01 8821915
Penny Roberts wrote:
> Christian Heilmann wrote:
>
>> Makes it a rather "preaching to the choir" excercise. What point is
>> there in keeping a lot of web design blogs unstyled to promote the use
>> of CSS? Who else but bloggers do care? If a lot of webshops or really
>> massive news portals would do it, that'll be different.
>
>
> Accessify have already gone naked: http://www.accessify.com/default.php
>
> Penny
>
>
>
>
>
From: Conyers, Dwayne
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 7:10AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Penny Roberts ink wired:
> Is anyone going (CSS) naked for the first
> annual CSS Naked Day tomorrow?
Well, I work in my home office so working naked is typical although it
does cause a stir when the UPS guy comes to deliver a package.
Oh, wait... you meant...
;~)
--
Dwacon
www.dwacon.com
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Tue, Apr 04 2006 8:50AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Woah, hold on a sec, I thought I am supposed to be the cranky and
blunt cynical guy. But there goes Christian stealing my lines!
On 4/4/06, Christian Heilmann < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'd say the idea is to promote a lot of web designers as themselves
> and an amazing back-patting exercise.
He's right, of course. This is pretty silly. But hey, cool web
designers love nothing more than a bandwagon. :)
> Reminds me of the greyday:
> http://web.archive.org/web/19990224113837/www.greyday.org/main.html
Oh, god, I thought Grey Day was stupid and self-centered.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com
From: Tim Beadle
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 3:10AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 04/04/06, Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> He's right, of course. This is pretty silly. But hey, cool web
> designers love nothing more than a bandwagon. :)
I'd imagine you'd be grateful that the bandwagon in question is
well-structured & semantic markup. I don't know - those pesky
designers who can make attractive, usable and accessible sites :)
> Oh, god, I thought Grey Day was stupid and self-centered.
It looks that way, but I'm just going on that archive.org link.
Cheers,
Tim
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 8:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 4/5/06, Tim Beadle < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'd imagine you'd be grateful that the bandwagon in question is
> well-structured & semantic markup. I don't know - those pesky
> designers who can make attractive, usable and accessible sites :)
I'm not convinced that this CSS version of "A Day Without A Mexican"
is actually providing anything useful. Especially as (a) we know that
good graphical design and layout are accessibility and usability
features, and (b) nobody these days "views" the web as seen here
anyway.
It might have more impact if everyone switched to a "zoom" layout by
default with ability to switch back to the normal view. This naked day
just seems pointless and rather backslappingly self-congratulatory
instead of truly educational or useful.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com
From: Daniel Champion
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 8:50AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn wrote:
>It might have more impact if everyone switched to a "zoom" layout by
>default with ability to switch back to the normal view.
That's an excellent idea IMHO, at least this would result in enhancements
to those sites taking part.
>This naked day just seems pointless and rather backslappingly
>self-congratulatory instead of truly educational or useful.
Indeed, the only effect I can see is to disorient visitors who aren't
savvy, potentially sending them scurrying to their virus/spyware checker
to see if they've been infected with something nasty. I'm struggling to
appreciate the positives that will accrue from CSS naked day, but then I'm
a grouch.
Dan
This email and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Clackmannanshire Council.
Clackmannanshire Council will not be liable for any losses as a result of viruses being passed on.
www.clacksweb.org.uk
From: Christian Heilmann
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:00AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
> I'm not convinced that this CSS version of "A Day Without A Mexican"
> is actually providing anything useful. Especially as (a) we know that
> good graphical design and layout are accessibility and usability
> features, and (b) nobody these days "views" the web as seen here
> anyway.
>
> It might have more impact if everyone switched to a "zoom" layout by
> default with ability to switch back to the normal view. This naked day
> just seems pointless and rather backslappingly self-congratulatory
> instead of truly educational or useful.
I still think a "keyboard only day" would be fun :)
Override all click events and test for keydown to send off links.
--
Chris Heilmann
Blog: http://www.wait-till-i.com
Writing: http://icant.co.uk/
Binaries: http://www.onlinetools.org/
From: L
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:10AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Christian Heilmann wrote:
"I still think a "keyboard only day" would be fun :)
Override all click events and test for keydown to send off links."
Now, that would be amusing. My guess would be an awful lot of very confused people trying to get things done :-)
Regards,
L
From: L
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:20AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
"This naked day just seems pointless and rather backslappingly self-congratulatory instead of truly educational or useful."
That's as may be, but at least it's trying to make a valid point and to promote a good practice in a way that's tangible for people to understand.
We spend much of our working lives instructing and guiding people on how to improve their sites, how to increase the user experience. Why should we not be the ones to make that point a little more forcibly by demonstrating the principles we teach.
I can't think of a better way of making a point than demonstrating by example, it makes it much easier to understand the separation of presentation from content when you see it in action.
It may be viewed as self congratulatory, but it's considerably more educational and useful than decrying a well intentioned effort to clearly demonstrate one of the more technical aspects of site design.
Regards,
L
From: Helen A
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:30AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
At 15:59 05/04/2006, L
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
L
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 9:50AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Helen A wrote:
> At 15:59 05/04/2006, L
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 10:00AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Daniel Champion wrote:
> Indeed, the only effect I can see is to disorient visitors who aren't
> savvy, potentially sending them scurrying to their virus/spyware checker
> to see if they've been infected with something nasty.
Hardly, since the first thing a visitor to the participating sites saw
was a notice explaining CSS Naked Day.
> appreciate the positives that will accrue from CSS naked day,
It brought attention to CSS, semantic mark-up, structure, hierachy; and
it did it in a fun way. I really don't understand why everyone is being
so negative about it.
but then I'm
> a grouch.
Then lighten up. No-one hurt you by doing this and the intention was good.
Penny
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 10:10AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> This naked day
> just seems pointless and rather backslappingly self-congratulatory
> instead of truly educational or useful.
Hardly. There was nothing back slapping or self-congratulatory about
the comments of the people taking part. Indeed many of them seemed a
tad apprehensive about what it might throw up.
Lighten up: it hasn't done any harm and the intention is good. If it
makes a few more people aware of the need for good mark-up, separation
of style and all the other things that we should espouse then it has
done what it set out to do. Why be so negative?
Penny
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 10:20AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 4/5/06, Penny Roberts < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> It brought attention to CSS, semantic mark-up, structure, hierachy; and
> it did it in a fun way.
And in a way which was very much centered on designers over
developers. More of the same.
> I really don't understand why everyone is being
> so negative about it.
Because it's a bad idea.
> Then lighten up. No-one hurt you by doing this and the intention was good.
"Lighten up" is yet another way of saying "our public stunt should be
above valid criticism," isn't it?
The intention may be good, sure. Good intentions don't make for a good
public stunt. This was a bad idea, and it deserves to be discussed and
condemned as such.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 10:30AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 4/5/06, L
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 10:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 4/5/06, Penny Roberts < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Lighten up: it hasn't done any harm and the intention is good. If it
> makes a few more people aware of the need for good mark-up, separation
> of style and all the other things that we should espouse then it has
> done what it set out to do. Why be so negative?
Because it's a bad idea, and because bad ideas aren't above criticism,
no matter if Penny Roberts really, really likes them or not.
It's a shame you feel that criticism of your public stunt is "so
negative" -- maybe it's negative because it's a bad idea. You seem to
be taking this much too personally. Perhaps you have too much invested
in this designer-centric self-congratulatory stunt?
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 11:10AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> How exactly is it less educational and useful to point out that this
> is a wholly DESIGNER-CENTRIC stunt that serves no benefit to the end
> user, and, in fact, may seriously degrade her ability to use many
> sites?
As the end user, i.e. the target audience, of the majority of the sites
that jumped on the bandwagon is other DESIGNERS (I love how, in your
posts, it clearly shines through that you'd pronounce it like it was a
dirty word), it's educational within the peer group. It's an in-joke.
Now, if this stunt was pulled on sites aimed at the general public, I'd
definitely be worried, yes. :)
Oh, and don't forget that nowadays, the lines between DESIGNERS and
DEVELOPERS are *shudder* blurring.
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
___________
re
From: L
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 11:20AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
"What's the valid point and who are you making it to?"
That content should work when separated from design. To anyone who has not understood the concepts involved, to anyone who happened across one of these sites and was curious to know why it looked unstyled, to the many people who read the web sites and blogs involved and who might be curious about what a site looks like when unstyled, to anyone interested in how a site may be presented to a screen reader user.
"Separation of presentation from content is something for WEB DEVELOPERS to worry about."
Of course it is, but who do you suppose is reading forums like Accessify or the blogs of developers and experts in the field. Not everyone is experienced and giving a practical demonstration may help new developers make the connection.
"In other words, you think you're above criticism."
Hardly. Besides, I didn't think you were criticising me personally, only the concept of CSS Naked Day. If I misunderstood, my apologies. *Smile.
"How exactly is it less educational and useful to point out that this is a wholly DESIGNER-CENTRIC stunt that serves no benefit to the end user, and, in fact, may seriously degrade her ability to use many sites?"
I find that criticism needs to be constructive, not dismissive, it's just a personal viewpoint. Either way, I think we agree on the benefits of separating structure from presentation, all we disagree on is the method of promoting it. For me, educational criticism would have been to suggest better ways to promote the same thing, rather than to dismiss the proposed method out of hand.
Were you thinking of a specific example when you mentioned site degredation?
Regards,
L
From: Christian Heilmann
Date: Wed, Apr 05 2006 11:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
> As the end user, i.e. the target audience, of the majority of the sites
> that jumped on the bandwagon is other DESIGNERS (I love how, in your
> posts, it clearly shines through that you'd pronounce it like it was a
> dirty word), it's educational within the peer group. It's an in-joke.
> Now, if this stunt was pulled on sites aimed at the general public, I'd
> definitely be worried, yes. :)
It makes it very inbred though, as I also pointed out on my disclaimer at:
http://wait-till-i.com/index.php
"So today is the first annual CSS Naked Day and as a great webdesigner
you to turn off the CSS on your blogs to show, well, what? That blogs
that thrive on content and syndication of content via RSS can work
without style sheets? We know that. Can I get some support to make
business aware of the benefits of CSS, too?"
I think zengarden has proved to the design community that CSS is
powerful and its job is to style structure, but then again looking at
the image replacement orgies there maybe not.
IMHO a web designer who still has not grasped the idea of separation
of content structure presentation and behaviour is not worth his money
or my time. We wasted enough time and money trying to force non-medium
designs onto the web. I cannot cram 4 pages of text into a 30 second
sound jingle either (although they try with the terms and conditions
in radio ads).
My disclaimer tomorrow will be Oh My God, it is full of styles!
http://wait-till-i.com/pics/fullofstyles.jpg
From: Daniel Champion
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 1:40AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Penny Roberts wrote:
>Hardly, since the first thing a visitor to the participating sites saw
>was a notice explaining CSS Naked Day.
And that explanation would have made almost no sense to someone who didn't
already get it, and most of those who don't already get it don't care, or
who shouldn't need to worry about it.
>It brought attention to CSS, semantic mark-up, structure, hierachy; and
>it did it in a fun way.
Fun for whom? Almost certainly not for the ordinary user - I visited a
couple of sites during the day and found the experience disorientating and
the sites hard to use, and it's my opinion that users who didn't know what
was going on would have had a more adverse reaction. The benefits of
semantic, structured HTML aren't made obvious by visiting an unstyled site
using a mouse, keyboard and desktop browser.
>I really don't understand why everyone is being so negative about it.
Maybe you're not trying hard enough to understand? I appreciate (and
support) the sentiment behind the idea of CSS Naked Day, but in my
*opinion* the mode of execution didn't adequately support the aims.
>No-one hurt you by doing this and the intention was good.
And similarly my misgivings hurt no-one, yet you feel it necessary to
pillory me and others who disagree with your view? I'd welcome some debate
of the points that are being made, but to do that you need to get over the
fact that there are those who might disagree with you.
Daniel.
This email and any attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Clackmannanshire Council.
Clackmannanshire Council will not be liable for any losses as a result of viruses being passed on.
www.clacksweb.org.uk
From: Tim Beadle
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 4:50AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 06/04/06, Penny Roberts < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> And it isn't necessarily a Bad Idea just because Kynn Bartlett sees the
> negative aspects of everything.
"Death by Devil's Advocate", anyone?
"Tom Kelley--general manager of IDEO--believes that "devil's advocate
may be the biggest innovation killer in America today." We've all been
in a meeting where a passionate idea is put forth but someone plays
devil's advocate and drains the life out of the room. Invoking "the
awesome protective power" lets the devil's advocate be incredibly
negative and slash your idea to shreds, all while appearing not only
innocent but reasoned, balanced, intelligent... all attributes loaded
with business "goodness". Whew! Thank GOD for the devil's advocate, or
we'd all be off blundering with our stupid ideas, oblivious to the
insurmountable problems we were too clueless to see.
And it's that attitude--that notion that people can use "playing
devil's advocate" with impunity--that Kelley believes is so damaging.
In the October edition of Fast Company magazine, there's an excerpt
from Kelley's upcoming book The Ten Faces of Innovation which is all
about ways to defeat the devil's advocate to keep innovation alive."
http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2005/10/death_by_devils.html
Tim
From: Penny Roberts
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 5:00AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> On 4/5/06, Penny Roberts < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Lighten up: it hasn't done any harm and the intention is good. If it
>> makes a few more people aware of the need for good mark-up, separation
>> of style and all the other things that we should espouse then it has
>> done what it set out to do. Why be so negative?
>
> Because it's a bad idea, and because bad ideas aren't above criticism,
> no matter if Penny Roberts really, really likes them or not.
And it isn't necessarily a Bad Idea just because Kynn Bartlett sees the
negative aspects of everything. I didn't have any strong feelings about
the idea one way or the other when I posted: it seemed like a fun way of
making a point and I wondered whether anyone was going to take
part.
The counter-arguments so far haven't convinced me that this is a Bad
Idea; nor have any of you convinced me that the people who are taking
part are doing so for self-promotion. I read the comments of the people
who were adding themselves to the list and the idea does seem to have
achieved what it set out to do: made people aware of the way their sites
are built.
> It's a shame you feel that criticism of your public stunt is "so
> negative" -- maybe it's negative because it's a bad idea.
It isn't my publicity stunt. I visited Accessify, saw that it was
CSS-less and followed the link to find out what it was all about. I
posted the link here to find out whether anyone here was taking part.
In what way does that make it my public stunt?
By all means discuss whether it is a good, bad or ill-conceived idea
but making attacks on the integrity of the people behind the idea when
they cannot defend themselves is hardly good debating technique.
You seem to
> be taking this much too personally. Perhaps you have too much invested
> in this designer-centric self-congratulatory stunt?
I don't have anything invested in it. I'm not taking it personally:
why should I? I do, however, feel that some of you are making judgements
on the motives of the originator(s) of the idea and those taking part
and I can see no justification for that.
Penny
From: Karl Groves
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 9:10AM
Subject: RE: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
One thing's for sure - this thread was OT to begin with, and has now just
become an argument. Please show the rest of us the courtesy take the
arguments off list.
Karl L. Groves
User-Centered Design, Inc.
Office: 703-729-0998
Mobile: 443-889-8763
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web: http://www.user-centereddesign.com
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 9:20AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | Next message →
On 4/6/06, Tim Beadle < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> On 06/04/06, Penny Roberts < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > And it isn't necessarily a Bad Idea just because Kynn Bartlett sees the
> > negative aspects of everything.
>
> "Death by Devil's Advocate", anyone?
For a mailing list which is based on the idea that we need to convince
people to do something which they don't want to do -- i.e. activism,
some of it involving telling folks they're doing the wrong things --
you folks are awful quick to whine and complain that someone might be,
you know, critical of something.
I find the two posts above -- "Kynn Bartlett sees the negative aspects
of everything" and "Death by Devil's Advocate" -- to be personal
attacks attacks against me.
Yes, I am skeptical of a lot of nonsense that goes on here. And yes, I
am direct and blunt. But I think a lot of you need to get over the
idea that attacking me instead of my ideas is a good idea.
> I do, however, feel that some of you are making judgements
> on the motives of the originator(s) of the idea and those taking part
> and I can see no justification for that.
This is a case of projection, given that you've impugned my motives.
I've repeatedly said their motives are good but their implementation
is pointless. Apparently you think people should be immune to
criticism -- what, unless they're me?
I'm done with this topic, and your little stunt (and I'm calling it
yours because you joined it, and you advertised it here) is over, at
least for this year. It was a bad idea, and I was right about it being
a bad idea -- and I was far from the only person to say it here, nor
was I the first person to say it.
If that's just cause for labeling me the Devil and claiming that I'm
destroying innovation in the marketplace or whatever, well, you folks
have your own problems to work out, I think.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Thu, Apr 06 2006 11:00AM
Subject: Re: Slightly OT: CSS Naked Day
← Previous message | No next message
On 4/6/06, Karl Groves < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> One thing's for sure - this thread was OT to begin with, and has now just
> become an argument. Please show the rest of us the courtesy take the
> arguments off list.
You're right. I'm done, and I apologize to everyone.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Writer, Web Developer, Photographer, Game Designer
Tucson, Arizona
http://kynn.com