| |
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> > [...] By the same token, the concept that there might be something wrong
> > with looking at an image to which there isn't a readily-obvious hyperlink
> > is ludicrous to (I think I'm safe in saying this) a vast majority of those
> > with a basic level of knowledge of the World Wide Web.
>
> Hmm, maybe that's the heart of the controversy right there!
>
> I dunno about the net population at large, but I'd certainly experience
> guilt feelings if I summoned up an image to which there was no readily-
> obvious hyperlink, because I'd assume that the reason there was no link
> was because I wasn't supposed to see it or find it. Then again, I'm not
> someone who snoops in people's medicine cabinets either (not that anyone
> here is).
That's silly. Those two have absolutely nothing to do with each
other.
Brad even specifically mentioned something about "by accident or by
intent". So you're telling me that if you accidentally mistype a
character in a URL and end up seeing an image you can't find a
hyperlink to you feel guilty? That's preposterous.
I won't say you're wrong and I'm right but I will say that if you
honestly feel guilt over something this, well, stupid, you're silly
and I'm not. :)
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
93 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
