Editing Talk:Sbemail 136 Alternate Versions

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
Current revision Your text
Line 15: Line 15:
:::::::Of course it should be here even if it's not officially published. It's definitely interesting. I'm glad I get to read it. Also, we don't just use the "What's new" section for official page updates even if it says so. It's been used for unofficial footage of gigs before, for example. It's an interesting, relevant piece of information. Why shouldn't we document and promote it?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 19:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Of course it should be here even if it's not officially published. It's definitely interesting. I'm glad I get to read it. Also, we don't just use the "What's new" section for official page updates even if it says so. It's been used for unofficial footage of gigs before, for example. It's an interesting, relevant piece of information. Why shouldn't we document and promote it?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 19:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::::::::"I could print out the RTF files, scan them, and upload them, but I don't really see what that would prove." Uhhh, it would prove that these alternate versions are REAL? Besides, anyone can make up an email, just look at some of the emails on the currently blocked SBEmail game on the forum. How is it "obvious" it's legit? --[[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 20:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::::::::"I could print out the RTF files, scan them, and upload them, but I don't really see what that would prove." Uhhh, it would prove that these alternate versions are REAL? Besides, anyone can make up an email, just look at some of the emails on the currently blocked SBEmail game on the forum. How is it "obvious" it's legit? --[[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 20:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
-
:::::::::Why on Earth would an extremely trustful admin who has been here for '''5 years''' make up such an elaborate fan fiction and claim it's real? And besides, when would he have the time to make it up? What, with dealing with the fanstuff closing, and probably a bunch of other admin-[[type]] stuff, ''that's'' why it's obvious it's legit. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 20:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::::::I'm saying it's obvious because the Chaps have a distinct sense of humor that is recognizable. The files they sent us are essentially plain text. Anyone could copy and paste the text from the article into their favorite word processor, print it out, scan it, and upload it just as easily as I could. It wouldn't prove anything. I suppose could paste the email headers, but I'm not going to do that because they contain private data. You know that the Chaps use our site as a reference, right? There's no reason to risk my reputation by faking alternate versions of emails that they would then deny. You can choose to believe me or not, but I'm telling you earnestly that this is real. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 20:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::::::::Personally, I think it's ridiculous to question It's dot com's integrity, that's why I ignored the request in my previous post. It didn't even cross my mind to question the authenticity of this.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 20:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::::::::I think it's a great article, and I know It's dot com is 100% trustworthy.  However, I was thinking about J. Random Casual User who comes across this; It's not ME, PERSONALLY who wants proof, it's THEM.  [[User:Stev0|Stev0]] 00:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
I don't know what others think, but I wouldn't be opposed to adding a line to the intro saying that it was an email sent to the wiki admins. It's true, it cites its source, and it makes sense to have. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 00:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:I dunno. It's not really material to the article itself, so I don't think it should go in the intro. Maybe the fun facts? The reason I posted it on the talk page was that it seemed too meta for the main namespace. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 01:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::We mention the source in the intro of pretty much every other thing aside from toosn and games that appear on the main site... so what makes this one different? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::I'd kinda like to keep the reference to ourselves as low-key as possible. They could have released it on their site, and it wouldn't change the content at all. We're just the messengers. But I do admit that it is notable how they released it, since after all they ''didn't'' put it on their site. I agree that "wiki exclusive" probably works fine without being too pompous, and so I've added it to the article. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::"Wiki Exclusive" works for me, and maybe a link to and/or from [[The Brothers Chaps' Fansite Acknowledgments]]. [[User:Stev0|Stev0]] 04:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
Just in case any of you boys had any lingering doubt, I can confirm as a second person with access to the admin email inbox that these alternate versions were sent to us by The Brothers Chaps. -- [[User:Tom|Tom]] 22:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Can you put the entire email on this talk page? If it contains personal info on you/Dot Com, then you can just block that part out right? --[[User:SBE-mail Checker Dan|SBE-mail Checker Dan]] 02:10, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::I've given my sincere word and Tom has confirmed it. You can believe me or not, but I'm not doing anything else. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:15, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
== Formatting ==
 
-
And while I'm here, don't you think the transcription should be fixed to be consistent with itself and the others? {{User:JCM/sig}} 01:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:From the page: "All formatting has been preserved, except that some bold text has been added and the actual emails have been set off to help with readability." {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::Yes, I saw that, but I'd like to know why it was done. Did TBC specifically ask for it or something like that? {{User:JCM/sig}} 01:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::We are sharing this document that was sent to the admins. It seems logical that it should be shared in its original form rather than modified. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 01:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::Yes. The point of releasing these alternate versions is not only to see what might have been toon-wise but also to see how the Chaps' creative process works. I didn't want to modify them at all, but adding the bold and separating the sent emails helped quite a bit. I figured that improving the readability while preserving as much of the rest of the formatting as possible would stay true to that point. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 02:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::Wow, neat.  It makes total sense for them to script out versions of emails first, I just never pictured them doing that.  What I think would be neat is to see a final draft of a script that got used, and then compare the difference to see how much ad-libbing or last minute changes goes on.  After all, we've all heard the out-takes. {{User:Invisible_Robot_Fish/sig}} 09:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
== Filmography On Paper ==
 
-
 
-
Both Marzipan and Homestar are currently linked in the fun facts. I didn't want to rearrange the linkings, but, just so everyone is linked, I was going to simply link their names the first time they speak. But then I thought, "Wait. This is just a rough draft. Should this be included in their filmographies?" So, should it? {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 21:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:I wondered all those things myself when I made the page and again later when I added the links. Do we have other examples of preliminary or deleted content on the wiki that we can use as a reference? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::I believe not. --[[Special:Contributions/209.148.176.136|209.148.176.136]] 21:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::While I do not believe that there is another instance of a time when a written draft or deleted cartoon was eventually released in a small manner such as this, we did put [[Field Day Intro]] and [[Where the Crap Are We?]] in filmographies. I think these small-release cartoons should go in the filmographies of the characters who appear in the cartoon/draft/script. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 23:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::Still, I don't think we should go all out like a regular toon, just to, as paraquoted from the page, "Preserve all formatting". No "'''Cast'''", "'''Places'''", "'''Computer'''", or any of that stuff. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 23:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::How about a centralized {{p|l={{FULLURL:{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}|diff=703497&oldid=703432}} character key}}? — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
== Quick Question ==
 
-
 
-
I notice the page says "intendo" near the end of the second draft where "Nintendo" makes sense. If this is the way it came, should there be a sic in front of that word? {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 18:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 
-
:I always thought that was part of a joke—it's just another way Homestar mispronounces things. If we were transcribing a finished toon, we'd probably put ''<nowiki></nowiki>'Intendo'' [[No Hands On Deck!|like we do with ''<nowiki></nowiki>'Kipedia'']]. I don't think it needs a ''sic''. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 19:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 
-
::I also thought it was part of the joke. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 20:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
== (sorry, Victoria) ==
 
-
 
-
Maybe it's just me being too uptight as usual, but I feel kinda uncomfortable having those parentheses there. Sure, it's a little funny, but it looks really unprofessional, and I mean&mdash; it's not ''that'' funny. Is it worth keeping or not? <small>In other news, these drafts are hilarious. Thanks for existing, wiki.</small> {{User:SRMX12/sig}} 18:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 
-
:I don't even see the joke in that bracket'd text. I also say delete. - {{User:Catjaz63/sig}} 20:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 
-
::Baleet. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 22:10, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 
-
:::I'm fine with it either way, but I don't think it was ''meant'' to be funny. Seems like the intent was to remind everyone that there was a person out there who could've had their email answered, but didn't. A simple acknowledgement of human feelings.
 
-
:::But I could be wrong, and then I'd have to eat yet another pony. Only [[User: It's dot com|It's dot com]] can say for sure... --{{User:Purple Wrench/sig}} 22:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 
-
::::It's been there since the very first version of this page, but I have no recollection of why I included it. &mdash; [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 21:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 

Your changes will be visible immediately. If you would like to test or practice editing, please do so in the sandbox. You are encouraged to create, expand, and improve upon articles; however, bad edits to articles are watched for and will be quickly removed.


CAPTCHA Image
Image Code:
Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)
You are required to enter a code from an image in order to perform certain operations. This image is designed to protect the site from vandalism. If the images are too obscured to read, just give it your best shot and a new image will be shown next time. If you are visually impaired or limited to text-based browsing, you can contact the site administrator and something can be arranged. The code is not case-sensitive.

The Homestar Runner Wiki is neither owned by nor affiliated with homestarrunner.com. Much of the material presented here is copyrighted by The Brothers Chaps and/or Harmless Junk, Inc. For more information, see the legal stuff page on the official Homestar Runner website. The proprietor of this site asserts that publication of such material on the wiki qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law.

Material on this site that is not copyrighted by The Brothers Chaps (e.g. opinions and mindless chatter) is licensed to the various authors, where indicated, and is released under a Creative Commons Deed, which simply ensures that none of this information may legally be used for commercial purposes.

Personal tools