Talk:Strong Bad Email By Name of Sender

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 00:09, 7 November 2007 by 130.15.199.171 (Talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Count fake e-mails?

FIRST COMMENT!

Anyway, my question. Should fake e-mails count in the list (example: Zebbadee from personal favorites)? I don't think they should. But, that's just my opinion.

Homsar999 20:51 9 Nov 2004 (CST)

I don't think any of the emails which have been shown are fake. --Upsilon

Nor do I. TBC chose to answer real e-mails, and since they have a plethara of e-mails to choose from, (1000's in their inbox), why wouldn't they use real ones all the time? If they ever did use fake ones, I betcha anything they would use one of their characters as the author, not some real-sounding person. -- Thunderbird 14:03, 11 Nov 2004 (MST)

Read the FAQ question on the site about all their emails being real. You'll see what I mean by fake emails (the ones from personal favorites).

Homsar999 21:18, 11 Nov 2004

That is one way to interpret the FAQ, yes. But by their being fake, I belive they are referring to the actual idea of a complete cinimatic animation as a whole, not the specific e-mail sent to them. The first question on the FAQ also reinforces our reasoning, where it affirms the recival of thousands of e-mails. So why not just use one or two of them? Unfortunately, however, the only way to get a definite answer from them is to actually ask them, an ability we both lack. So until they specifically answer that question, we don't really have a way of knowing exactly what is fake, and what isn't. It's fair to say that at least some of the un-featured e-mails come from real people, so for the time being, since a clear line cannot be drawn, I belive it is also safe to leave them on, using the old reasoning of 'better safe than sorry'. I don't really see a problem with it. And I'm sure that Upsilon, among others, will agree with my case and cause. -- Thunderbird 01:45, 12 Nov 2004 (MST)

I fixed your spelling of "unfortunately", Thunderbird. I thought you were a stickler for grammar! :D Just kidding. --Homsar999 1:17, 14 Nov 2004

Yea, I usually am. I misspell just a few, like 10 or 12 select words. I can't be bothered with spellcheck, so if I don't know I just guess. But yes, I do enjoy the correct puncuation, grammar, and spelling. Thanks for noticing. --Thunderbird 02:39, 14 Nov 2004 (MST)

We do know that "mile" isn't a real e-mail.

Hey, I just checked the 'mile' DVD easter eggs, and lo and behold, it seems like you're right! But I still don't feel right just getting rid of the mile e-mail author, because TBC made him up. The way I see it, lets just say it's from TBC, perhaps an alter-ego of theirs, and leave it at that. We can't really just delete one specific e-mail. I left a raw code note though. [[User:Thunderbird L17|⇔Thunderbird⇔]] 09:45, 30 Jan 2005 (MST)
I noticed "Leonard Nimoy" in the list, mentioned in one of the dreamails. Does those count? They both seem made up for the toon. I didn't delete Nimoy because I figured, if 128 Hot Katies can be in the list, why not him? Opinions? — It's dot com 00:29, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Tables

I tried out tables on the A and B. Any comments, suggestions? Should I continue? Should N/A be italicized or not? Should something else go there instead, such as 'none', or even just nothing at all? Thanks. [[User:Thunderbird L17|⇔Thunderbird⇔]] 00:46, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)

I personally think that splitting First Name and Last Name into separate columns is a bit silly, because many people never give a last name, and of course there are cases of two-part last names or middle names (often difficult to tell the difference), and things like "Anonymous Contributor". That's my only real complaint. Nickname isn't such a big deal because it's separate from the given name, and actually pops up more often than last names (due to Strong Bad's Strong-Badiness.) --Jay 01:03, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)
Oh, yeah, and I think any word (or none) that indicates no nickname is okay, but yes, something like italics or grayed text should be used to distinguish. IMHO. --Jay 01:15, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)
Thanks Jay, I'm gonna follow your advice and go for it. Oh, and thanks for Alphabatizing, if it was you that did that. I said I was going to, but then kinda got sidetracked with '03 - '01 updates.

[[User:Thunderbird L17|⇔Thunderbird⇔]] 09:38, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)

Well, they were already arranged by the first letter of the name. But yeah, I alphabetized them within the letters. And it's looking good to me! --Jay 09:46, 26 Feb 2005 (MST)
The tables look good guys, but could we make the columns a consistent width between each letter? It would mean some rows were wider than others because they would have more data, which I could live with. - Dr Haggis - Talk 18:00, 25 Mar 2005 (MST)

"None"

I like the tables. But do you think it's necessary to say "None" for every one in which there's no nickname? I think you could alleviate some clutter just by leaving it blank. — InterruptorJones[[]] 10:03, 28 Feb 2005 (MST)

Agreed. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]
Hmmm... I gotta say, it's painful, but I agree with you. It's not THAT big of a deal though, so I'm comfortable to just leave it. If there are any volunteers for going through them all and getting rid of it though, be my guest. Maybe once I get around to finishing the place tables, I'll come back to it if it's not finished yet.

[[User:Thunderbird L17|⇔Thunderbird⇔]] 16:43, 7 Mar 2005 (MST)

I'm fine with the "None"s. They can stay IMO, but I have some free time on my hands, and I'll get rid of them if you guys are sure that's what you want. (Someone has to verify that though, or else I won't do it. --Joshua 17:02, 19 Mar 2005 (MST)
Nevermind, I have some free time so I'll do it. It seems like no one wants them there anyway. Besides, you guys can always revert if it turns out bad. --Joshua 18:50, 25 Mar 2005 (MST)


Dr Haggis, I have to tell you, I love what you've done with the page. The table of contents, lining up the tables, it just looks so great. I really appreciate it when someone with actual 'coding' expertice comes along and fixes my base pages. Keep up the good work. [[User:Thunderbird L17|⇔Thunderbird⇔]] 16:45, 26 Mar 2005 (MST)

Ew, Claire! Why not?

Trogga keeps attempting to remove Claire from Luke in origins, saying in the last update that he only used Claire in reference to the city. Totally not the case:

So ya see Claire, if it weren't for the stick, and Marzipan's considerable resistance to death, the On Point Kings...

SB is referring to the email writer as Claire. Right there. --Jay 21:44, 5 Apr 2005 (MDT)

Dang, missed that one. Sorry. --Trogga 15:30, 6 Apr 2005 (MDT)

Dan Supreme!

People named "Dan, Danny, Daniel, and Dans with last names have emailed a record of NINE TIMES! This gives them signifigance of some sort. Amy Whifflepoof 17:25, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Name of Sender

When I see "By Name", I think "By Title". This page should be moved to "By Name of Sender". — It's dot com 09:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 09:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I concur. -- Tom 10:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Done. — It's dot com 10:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Emails by H*R Wiki users

Wasn't there an email that was sent by an H*R Wiki user? I'm trying to find it, just for curiosity’s sake, but I can't. Maybe their name on here should link to their user page.--Antisexy 19:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there were several. See here. Homestar-Winner (talk) 19:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Cool. Well, then is the link on here to their user pages a bad idea then?--Antisexy 19:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Claire vs. Eau Claire

Many of the nicknames refer to the place name rather than the sender's own name. Is there some way of making this more clear? Merging the two pages would be difficult and counter-productive, but perhaps some sort of reference can be added to show the rationale for assigning a nickname not in any way associated with the person's name.

Also, just as a postscriptum, is it ok to delete some of the stuff on the discussion pages if it's been resolved? Not to point fingers, but an example is the section about removing "none" when there is no nickname. I mean, it's essentially served its purpose by now, hasn't it?

Personal tools