generator playlist w/ mp3 player.

On 13 Lug, 17:56, David Mark <dmark.cins....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 13, 10:01 am, whebz <wheb....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > hello guys.
> > i have a request from you guys. i need some help to make a script that
On 13 Lug, 17:56, David Mark <dmark.cins....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 13, 10:01 am, whebz <wheb....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > hello guys.
> > i have a request from you guys. i need some help to make a script that
> > generate a mp3 player like this inwww.myflashpetish.com.
> > hope you'll help me..
>
> > thanks in advance
>
> What mp3 player? That link led to one of those stupid keyword sites
> that seem to exist only to clog up the search engines.
>
> If it does have an MP3 player somewhere, I would avoid replicating it
> as it is one of the worst pages I have ever seen.
>
> So do you have a real question or are you the jackass that wrote this
> page looking for hits?

i have a question.. i want a script that create an xml file that
should be the playlist plus a flash mp3 player that will play the
playlist.. did you get my question?

On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz <wheb... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 Lug, 17:56, David Mark <dmark.cins... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:> On Jul 13, 10:01 am, whebz <wheb... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > hello guys.
> > > i have a request from you guys. i need some help to make a script that
>
> On 13 Lug, 17:56, David Mark <dmark.cins... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 13, 10:01 am, whebz <wheb... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > hello guys.
> > > i have a request from you guys. i need some help to make a script that
> > > generate a mp3 player like this inwww.myflashpetish.com.
> > > hope you'll help me..
>
> > > thanks in advance
>
> > What mp3 player? That link led to one of those stupid keyword sites
> > that seem to exist only to clog up the search engines.
>
> > If it does have an MP3 player somewhere, I would avoid replicating it
> > as it is one of the worst pages I have ever seen.
>
> > So do you have a real question or are you the jackass that wrote this
> > page looking for hits?
>
> i have a question.. i want a script that create an xml file that
> should be the playlist plus a flash mp3 player that will play the
> playlist.. did you get my question?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer. There
was a recent discussion of just such a thing.

David Mark wrote:
> On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz wrote:
<snip>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer.
> There was a recent discussion of just such a thing.

On the subject of snipping material that is not relevant to a reply, and
so quoting material by exclusion, why have you quoted "Show quoted text"
above and attributed it to an author who did not write it? Miss-quoting
and editing without any indication of doing so may be regarded as
disingenuous but putting words in other people's mouths is unambiguously
dishonest.

Richard.

"Richard Cornford" <Richard.DeleteThis@litotes.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:f7jmvu$96o$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
> David Mark wrote:
>> On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz wrote:
> <snip>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer.
>> There was a recent discussion of just such a thing.
>
> On the subject of snipping material that is not relevant to a reply, and
> so quoting material by exclusion, why have you quoted "Show quoted text"
> above and attributed it to an author who did not write it? Miss-quoting
> and editing without any indication of doing so may be regarded as
> disingenuous but putting words in other people's mouths is unambiguously
> dishonest.
>
> Richard.

What are you talking about? "-Show quoted text-" is obviously
auto-generated Google BS. Nobody thinks "Whebz" wrote that. And what if
they did?

@david

thanks bro. i'll search it here.

@richard

david is right. i didn't write that.

David Mark said the following on 7/17/2007 9:06 PM:
> "Richard Cornford" <Richard RemoveThis @litotes.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:f7jmvu$96o$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
>> David Mark wrote:
>>> On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer.
>>> There was a recent discussion of just such a thing.
>> On the subject of snipping material that is not relevant to a reply, and
>> so quoting material by exclusion, why have you quoted "Show quoted text"
>> above and attributed it to an author who did not write it? Miss-quoting
>> and editing without any indication of doing so may be regarded as
>> disingenuous but putting words in other people's mouths is unambiguously
>> dishonest.
>>
>> Richard.
>
> What are you talking about? "-Show quoted text-" is obviously
> auto-generated Google BS.

Then you should get a newsreader instead of the Google BS web front.
Besides, many people post from GG without that "-Show quoted text-"
Google BS showing up in the post. Leaving it there reflects more on you
than Google Groups though. It shows your inability to properly snip.

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

On Jul 21, 2:19 am, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH... DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote:
> David Mark said the following on 7/17/2007 9:06 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Richard Cornford" <Rich... DeleteThis @litotes.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:f7jmvu$96o$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
> >> David Mark wrote:
> >>> On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz wrote:
> >> <snip>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer.
> >>> There was a recent discussion of just such a thing.
> >> On the subject of snipping material that is not relevant to a reply, and
> >> so quoting material by exclusion, why have you quoted "Show quoted text"
> >> above and attributed it to an author who did not write it? Miss-quoting
> >> and editing without any indication of doing so may be regarded as
> >> disingenuous but putting words in other people's mouths is unambiguously
> >> dishonest.
>
> >> Richard.
>
> > What are you talking about? "-Show quoted text-" is obviously
> > auto-generated Google BS.
>
> Then you should get a newsreader instead of the Google BS web front.

Obviously I have a newsreader, but post from the Web when it is more
convenient for me to do so. You needn't concern yourself with that.

> Besides, many people post from GG without that "-Show quoted text-"
> Google BS showing up in the post. Leaving it there reflects more on you
> than Google Groups though. It shows your inability to properly snip.

I mis-snipped. Oh well. The rant that followed was still absurd.

David Mark wrote:
> Richard Cornford wrote:
>> David Mark wrote:
>>> On Jul 17, 7:47 am, whebz wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> I got your question. Try searching the group for an answer.
>>> There was a recent discussion of just such a thing.
>>
>> On the subject of snipping material that is not relevant to a
>> reply, and so quoting material by exclusion, why have you
>> quoted "Show quoted text" above and attributed it to an author
>> who did not write it? Miss-quoting and editing without any
>> indication of doing so may be regarded as disingenuous but
>> putting words in other people's mouths is unambiguously dishonest.
>>
>> Richard.
>
> What are you talking about?

I have quoted precisely what I was talking about; an attribution of
quoted material to an individual and material included in that quote
that was never written by that individual.

> "-Show quoted text-" is obviously auto-generated Google BS.

Obvious to who, and when? Google groups' programmers are clearly out of
their depth and sinking fast. They have written something sufficiently
beyond their understanding of it that whenever they tie off one loose
thread at one point another (or several) unravels somewhere else. The
notion of their not showing quoted text in Usenet threads is wrong to
start with (as we quote to provide context for responses, and that
context is usually significant), their approach to hiding quotes inept
(they hide the closing brace in many posted script examples), and there
is certainly absolutely no reason why text that they have added to the
user interface should find itself being automatically included in
pre-marked quoted material for a response. But the bottom line remains
that it was you who posted this misrepresentation of what you were
responding to and so you who are responsible for it.

And as to how "obvious" it is, or will be; two years ago google were not
hiding quoted material when they displayed Usenet posts, and in two
years time they may not be doing so again (or using a different
indicator of doing so). Or google may have degenerated so far that
people prefer a different archive when researching Usenet posts. So it
may be anything but obvious in a historical context. And that still
assumes that people using Usenet now are also familiar with google
groups. Many are but it is unlikely that all are, and certainly it would
be inappropriate to assume that all were even if that were true.

> Nobody thinks "Whebz" wrote that.

Today maybe not, over time who can say.

> And what if they did?

The specific impact in this case is irrelevant. The principal is what is
important. When you attribute a quote to someone then the marked quote
should be what they actually wrote (with omitted sections marks so that
it is clear that edits have been made (with the exception of signatures
which should always be edited out and so doing that needs no
indication)). Anything else is disingenuous at best and libellous at
worst.

Richard.

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***