Okay, so recently, I had just come back from a long day of classes and work, and I decided to add a new meditation. I started to write just a stream of consiousness. I put down some of my thoughts about voting practices here, my experiences on the site in general, and even a rather large confession along with a solicitation for forgiveness. It wasn't really anything about Perl, but more about the site. And it was as I said before, an outpouring of my mind. I was planning on adding another paragraph or two, when all of a sudden, Netscape crashed and burned. My work was destroyed. I was mildly annoyed to say the least, and to this day, I have not had the time or inclination to write it all out again. Aside from the confession, it was mostly garbage.

But this raises an interesting question in my mind. How many of you have started to prepare nodes that were never submitted. How many nodes were unborn, and what would they have said?

Of course the true lesson here is "Write your nodes in your editor of choice and THEN upload them, but still...


Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(jcwren) RE: Nodes that never were.
by jcwren (Prior) on Oct 30, 2000 at 04:24 UTC
    I more often than not compose my nodes in Wordpad (no flames!), complete with paragraphs, etc. I then go back and insert the HTML so that it looks like I expect (typically a <BR><BR> for paragraphs), any italics, bolding, etc, then cut and paste it into the text box.

    I do this not so much because of Netscape crashes (IE *does* tend to be more stable, like it or not), but back from when the site would get lots of server errors. Or, in case I do something remarkably stupid, like forgetting to click new. I don't typically save the Wordpad document unless the net seems unusually flakey, but I usually don't close Wordpad until I see the node submitted successfully.

    Using Wordpad, or any other editor besides the text box, gives a better feel for the article, since you're seeing more of it at one time. I think seeing more of it in the editor also helps you reflect on the overall tone of the article, and allows you to judge what you're saying before you go on a holy flame war. And, you can even run spell check against it.


    e-mail jcwren
RE: Nodes that never were.
by extremely (Priest) on Oct 30, 2000 at 04:40 UTC
    I'm real bad about clicking around with the mouse while editing in these boxes and accidentally reloading or navigating my text entry away.

    When I get paranoid or real into it these days, I select the body of text into the cut-n-paste buffer for a temporary backup. =) It's saved the gist of my thoughts more than once...

    $you = new YOU;
    honk() if $you->love(perl)

RE: Nodes that never were.
by AgentM (Curate) on Oct 30, 2000 at 05:42 UTC
    A moment of silence please while we remember the genius nodes that Netscape didn't want to see posted...
    /----------\ | R. I. P. | | | | --^-@ | _____________

    AgentM Systems nor Nasca Enterprises nor Bone::Easy nor Macperl is responsible for the comments made by AgentM. Remember, you can build any logical system with NOR.
RE: Nodes that never were.
by jeorgen (Pilgrim) on Oct 30, 2000 at 18:11 UTC
    About a third of my nodes never make it, when I realise that:

    a) I 'm plain wrong, or don't get it worked out properly

    b) Somebody else put it better