You don't know of a text version of that presentation do you. The download time of a4 gifs over my 56k (40k mostly) dial up makes reading it painful.

I get one blank black frame, and two blank white frames. No content.

I'm using mozilla on linux, hardly a standards-hostile setup.

I think it is Powerpoint generating somewhat less than standard complient code. (Of course it seems that lots of places have non conforming html code)

Yeah, that's about 40% of Microsoft's strategy, lock users in with closed-file formats. Make it hell for them to use anything else.

The worst part about it is that it's a damn good strategy. It works because people are far too short-sighted to switch (oh, well I already have word, upgrades only cost this much more, we're a microsoft only company, blah blah blah) and seem to blame everything except their own inaction.

This has and will continue to do sever damage. There are alternatives. There is no excuse to post, or link to, proprietary crud anymore.

Same here. Quite disappointing.

---

If the above content is missing any vital points or you feel that any of the information is misleading, incorrect or irrelevant, please feel free to downvote the post. At the same time, please reply to this node or /msg me to inform me as to what is wrong with the post, so that I may update the node to the best of my ability.

It doesn't work with Mozilla (that's what I tried first), but fine with IE.

but fine with IE,

Why doesn't that surprise me.

Don't bother linking to stories that use proprietary file formats, you're only supporting them. If you really want to do some good, convert them to an open format and get the author's permission to post them. Otherwise don't bother, it doesn't contribute anything.

(insert obligatory rant on you know what =)

but it was quite worth bringing up the vmware winblows box (and obligatory service patch and VML downloads).

i wish somebody would PDFify it for everybody else.

definately a ++

Makeshifts last the longest.

The Anonymous Monk's 3 rules of moderation systems:

• Any system which assigns a number to a user, not just their words, will fail.
• Any system which showcases the worst will fail.
• Any system that admits it isn't a good system, but does not try to improve itself, will fail.

The End.

• Here, users, as well as their nodes, are assigned a number.
• Here, we showcase the worst.
• Here, most of us recognize the moderation system has flaws.

What do you mean by "fail?"

How far in the future do you predict failure? (There is, you see, a significant difference between next year, next century, and when the universe collapses.)

Why will these moderation systems fail? You don't suggest causes, just properties. You could just as well say "any car with a round steering wheel will eventually need to be repaired." The statement may turn out to be true but truth alone doesn't make it profound. What about those cars in the shop because of engine trouble?

I think your 3 little rules are a bunch of second-rate pseudo-intellectual tripe. Well, either that or you're a troll. Probably both.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

I would agree with the first rule -- if "number" is meant to be "vote". In that case, we don't have numbers for persons, only for what they write. It is not possible on PerlMonks to vote on a person (which IMHO is a good thing).Yes, we do have XP, but about everybody knows that this does not reflect the competence of a person. Plus you can't change the XP value of another person directly.

As for the second rule; we do not showcase the "lowliest monks", only the worst content.

Which leads me to the conclusion that the future of PerlMonks actually looks rather bright :-)