Starting something you couldn't finish
Finnbar says: I used to know a guy who tattooed LOVE across his left knuckles, but didn't tattoo HATE on the other knuckles because he was right-handed and realised he couldn't finish. Ever run out of skills or inspiration halfway through a job?
( , Thu 24 Jun 2010, 13:32)
Finnbar says: I used to know a guy who tattooed LOVE across his left knuckles, but didn't tattoo HATE on the other knuckles because he was right-handed and realised he couldn't finish. Ever run out of skills or inspiration halfway through a job?
( , Thu 24 Jun 2010, 13:32)
« Go Back
Iconic?
I've been told by many people that it's not hard to build a website. That mastering HTML is no great shakes. And I've believed them.
I never had any intention of building a great site; but, all the same, I don't like having no idea at all how to build one at all, and I've been meaning to get a teach-yourself-HTML-for-dummies kind of book for years. People tell me I'm smart(ish): I should be able to do it.
My ambitions are now getting progressively less ambitious. I've long given up on building a tolerably impressive site. Tolerably impressive became tolerable; tolerable became basic; basic became... well, I can't even be arsed working out what one-step-below-basic would be.
So I set my sights lower. For a while, I thought that I'd be happy simply knowing how to make an icon for the minichallenge, or how to make a hat for my icon. Maybe they'd serve as nice, small, interim targets.
Nope. Not even that. I still don't even know how to make the left-and-right-pointing chevron things appear in this box. (You know: the pointier version of { and }.)
So it's not so much starting something I couldn't finish, as never really getting beyond a vague aspiration to do something that I believe to be pretty easy. Damn me and my indolence.
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:08, 12 replies)
I've been told by many people that it's not hard to build a website. That mastering HTML is no great shakes. And I've believed them.
I never had any intention of building a great site; but, all the same, I don't like having no idea at all how to build one at all, and I've been meaning to get a teach-yourself-HTML-for-dummies kind of book for years. People tell me I'm smart(ish): I should be able to do it.
My ambitions are now getting progressively less ambitious. I've long given up on building a tolerably impressive site. Tolerably impressive became tolerable; tolerable became basic; basic became... well, I can't even be arsed working out what one-step-below-basic would be.
So I set my sights lower. For a while, I thought that I'd be happy simply knowing how to make an icon for the minichallenge, or how to make a hat for my icon. Maybe they'd serve as nice, small, interim targets.
Nope. Not even that. I still don't even know how to make the left-and-right-pointing chevron things appear in this box. (You know: the pointier version of { and }.)
So it's not so much starting something I couldn't finish, as never really getting beyond a vague aspiration to do something that I believe to be pretty easy. Damn me and my indolence.
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:08, 12 replies)
Calling you smart(ish)...
Is like calling the universe Big(ish)
But I can build a website though...
*skips off gloating to himself*
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:11, closed)
Is like calling the universe Big(ish)
But I can build a website though...
*skips off gloating to himself*
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:11, closed)
Try a CMS
Contao's worth a look. Much more efficient than writing from scratch, and has approximately 8 bajillion pre-built plugins. Can get a functional site up and running in a couple of hours...
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:50, closed)
Contao's worth a look. Much more efficient than writing from scratch, and has approximately 8 bajillion pre-built plugins. Can get a functional site up and running in a couple of hours...
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 14:50, closed)
You can put
< and > in the body of the message by writing them as < and >.
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 18:27, closed)
< and > in the body of the message by writing them as < and >.
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 18:27, closed)
Ta!
(That rings a bell: I must have been told that several times before and never remembered. It prompts a question, though: how did you write the codes here without them appearing as chevronny thingies?)
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 19:27, closed)
(That rings a bell: I must have been told that several times before and never remembered. It prompts a question, though: how did you write the codes here without them appearing as chevronny thingies?)
( , Fri 25 Jun 2010, 19:27, closed)
« Go Back