Hey all. I am not a programmer. I found BlueVoda online, and it has a lot of useful tools and looks easy to use, good tutorials.
Question is, will I be able to upload and publish a website created by BlueVoda? What issues may I face? I will be creating a lot of sub-domains, and using a template, so to make things MUCH easier for me.
BlueVoda is an extremely bad WYSIWYG editor designed to trap users into getting a “VodaHost” account. It creates dreadful, bloated HTML (or something resembling HTML, anyway) pages using code not seen since the mid '90s. No modern technologies are supported (not even PHP). It is so bad, you’d be better off with almost anything else.
Doesn’t it? But that statement could be applied to pretty much all of the WYSIWYG editors out there. BlueVoda is particularly bad because it produces old-style presentational pseudo HTML that only works as intended in IE. I read the Wikipedia article on it this morning, and it was less complimentary than I was LOL.
Which has what, exactly, to do with BlueVoda? Could you be more “off topic”? Scjessey’s post was relevant to the thread. Okay, so you don’t like the way scjessey sysops on the wiki - we get it!
So go edit the wiki page if you like, and argue about the edits and reversions on the wiki itself, or start a new thread in “Off Topic” if you’d rather “shout in a hotel lobby”. Interjecting your “off topic” peeves into an unrelated thread is just trollish.
Contrary to what is implied in your post, that page is not protected, so go have at it if you want.
It is not an article, Bob. It is a very popular, multi-lesson tutorial that has helped many thousands of people learn the basics of XHTML. It was entirely appropriate for me to suggest that the OP could learn XHTML instead of trying to struggle with a poor WYSIWYG editor.
I don’t know anything about BlueVoda, so I can’t answer that question - but I agree NVU or kompozer is a great editor.
So… you’re saying jessey doesn’t spam that link…
Wow, very controlling, and defaming. So sorry, but my comment was on what was said in this thread. The link is related to current activities in the wiki. Often you call similar links “spam.” The subject line was adequately modified.
Twisted semantics as you should know - it’s not protected automatically by software, but you damn well know it’s very protected by jessey with his admin status. You also damn well know attempts to “have at it” will run into banning and be a waste of time.
If you do say so yourself, jessey. OK, a multi-page article then. Nobody said otherwise. So… you’re saying you don’t spam that link, like you prevent other people from doing.
The term troll should be used with attention since it is a very easy way of undermining an opposing point of view. Sometimes, overly using the word “troll” may constitute trolling in itself.
Re: Defaming and controlling: “Stalkers may slander or defame the character of their victims which may isolate the victims and give the stalkers more control or a feeling of power.”
Ha ha ha! That’s rich, indeed. I point out that a particular act on your part is “trollish” and you start screaming, 'shenanigans!" meh … if you think for one minute, you have been “defamed” in any way that is actionable, locate some some money that you don’t mind wasting, throw it at a lawyer, and get yourself some education on the matter.
Wikipedia may be useful for a lot of things, but you have to be able to understand the different contexts in which words are used, particularly when it comes to things that have common usage meanings and legal meanings, or you will end up just looking ignorant when you repeat things you read.
This forum is for “3rd Party Software & Scripts”, and the thread was about BlueVoda. Your interjecting your whine/bitch/kvetch/protest/whatever with scjessey’s linking practices and/or sysop activity in the wiki does constitue “trolling” in my opinion, and blathering on about how you interpret Wikipedia’s definitions of such behavior is just as “off-topic” as your original trollish post.
If you don’t like your posts being referred to as “trollish”, then don’t make off-topic posts that attack others and hijack threads.
It’s simple enough to start your own thread, in an appropriate forum with an accurately descriptive subject/title, though I admit that might not meet the goals of a “troll”, because people could then actually choose to read the post based on it’s subject, rather than have it foisted upon them when viewing a thread about a WYSYWYG html editor. A lot of users use the “flat” view in this forum, and changing the subject line doesn’t remove the “off-topic” post from that view.
How you derive “you’re saying jessey does spam that link” from my post is beyond reasoning, and your attempt to hijack this thread into a discussion of wikipedia edits is just another typical troll tactic. Once again, completely off-topic, and irrelevant to the thread in which it was posted.
Playing with this kind of a troll has no positive aspect, little entertainment value, and is, in fact, just boring - so I’m done with you. Enjoy yourself, by yourself.
Give me a little credit for a more thoughtful comment than your “on-topic” comment to that point: "Well, that pretty much sucks … "
So… you’re saying jessey does spam that link…
It’s playing with the fact you never addressed my comment regarding frequent “posting” and protecting of that link. You went straight to off-topic claims and ad hominem attacks. Yeah, it’s not funny when it has to be explained. In short sentences.
Yeah, nobody likes to be seen as the pot calling the kettle black. Simple explanation: You change the topic to avoid addressing a comment. You call people trolls and puppets and topic changers, when lo and behold, maybe you is one.
Last word. For once. Woot. Well, that pretty much doesn’t sucks …
Ha ha ha. Well, doh! that’s called “ignoring your comment”. You can troll, and try to entice, bait, needle, etc. others into discussing what you want to discuss, but it seems you don’t always succeed.
You did, however, succeed in presenting just enough “entertainment potential” to entice me to respond in spite of my firm intention to completely ignore you; My bad - score one for the troll and congratulations on your success with that.
Oh, hell! now I’ve spoiled the “last word” status that seems important to you and as as result, no doubt, we’ll all get to read another of your brilliant responses; mea culpa!