Podcast talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

2020-04-11T02:04:11Z

Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:04, 11 April 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)		:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)

	The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)		The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)

	== Sackhoff speculation ==		== Sackhoff speculation ==
	In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)		In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)
	:Thanks for the clarification. I had no idea who they were referring to, although I did suspect it was Welbourn only because I Googled "Katee Sackhoff Chiefs" and came up with [http://www.tv.com/katee-sackhoff/person/3140/trivia.html this (scroll down to # 9)]. Not a reliable source, so I didn't link to it in the podcast. -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 13:57, 20 March 2006 (CST)		:Thanks for the clarification. I had no idea who they were referring to, although I did suspect it was Welbourn only because I Googled "Katee Sackhoff Chiefs" and came up with [http://www.tv.com/katee-sackhoff/person/3140/trivia.html this (scroll down to # 9)]. Not a reliable source, so I didn't link to it in the podcast. -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 13:57, 20 March 2006 (CST)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II (podcast) moved to Podcast talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II: moving to podcast namespace

2006-04-20T14:05:24Z

Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II (podcast) moved to Podcast talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II: moving to podcast namespace

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:05, 20 April 2006
(No difference)

April Arcus: Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part 2 (podcast) moved to Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II (podcast)

2006-03-24T22:58:04Z

Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part 2 (podcast) moved to Talk:Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II (podcast)

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:58, 24 March 2006
(No difference)

Laineylain: /* Sackhoff speculation

2006-03-20T19:57:12Z

/* Sackhoff speculation

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:57, 20 March 2006
Line 9:		Line 9:
	== Sackhoff speculation ==		== Sackhoff speculation ==
	In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)		In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)
			:Thanks for the clarification. I had no idea who they were referring to, although I did suspect it was Welbourn only because I Googled "Katee Sackhoff Chiefs" and came up with [http://www.tv.com/katee-sackhoff/person/3140/trivia.html this (scroll down to # 9)]. Not a reliable source, so I didn't link to it in the podcast. -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 13:57, 20 March 2006 (CST)

Steelviper: + Sackhoff speculation

2006-03-20T19:20:49Z

+ Sackhoff speculation

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 20 March 2006
Line 6:		Line 6:

	The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)		The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)

			== Sackhoff speculation ==
			In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)

April Arcus at 20:50, 13 March 2006

2006-03-13T20:50:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:50, 13 March 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:
	I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)		I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)
	:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)		:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)

			The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)

Laineylain: /* Br's vs. CRLF's */

2006-03-13T20:45:18Z

Br's vs. CRLF's

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:45, 13 March 2006
Line 3:		Line 3:
	== Br's vs. CRLF's ==		== Br's vs. CRLF's ==
	I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)		I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)
			:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)

Steelviper: breaks versus returns

2006-03-13T19:57:52Z

breaks versus returns

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:57, 13 March 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Hey, were they kidding about Edward James Olmos not returning for Season Three? They joked about doing him in CGI instead afterwards so I assume they were kidding [[User:Rocky8311\|Rocky8311]] 15:17, 12 March 2006 (CST)		Hey, were they kidding about Edward James Olmos not returning for Season Three? They joked about doing him in CGI instead afterwards so I assume they were kidding [[User:Rocky8311\|Rocky8311]] 15:17, 12 March 2006 (CST)

			== Br's vs. CRLF's ==
			I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)

Rocky8311 at 21:17, 12 March 2006

2006-03-12T21:17:54Z

New page

Hey, were they kidding about Edward James Olmos not returning for Season Three? They joked about doing him in CGI instead afterwards so I assume they were kidding [[User:Rocky8311|Rocky8311]] 15:17, 12 March 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:04, 11 April 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)		:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)

	The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)		The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)

	== Sackhoff speculation ==		== Sackhoff speculation ==
	In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)		In this podcast they mention that she was dating the starting right guard of the Chiefs. Seeing as how [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/will_shields/ Will Shields] is pretty married and off the market, they're probably confusing the position with the starting right tackle, [http://www.kcchiefs.com/player/john_welbourn/ John Welbourn]. Not sure if anybody will care, but as a Chiefs fans I knew instantly that they were wrong when they said it was the right guard. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:20, 20 March 2006 (CST)
	:Thanks for the clarification. I had no idea who they were referring to, although I did suspect it was Welbourn only because I Googled "Katee Sackhoff Chiefs" and came up with [http://www.tv.com/katee-sackhoff/person/3140/trivia.html this (scroll down to # 9)]. Not a reliable source, so I didn't link to it in the podcast. -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 13:57, 20 March 2006 (CST)		:Thanks for the clarification. I had no idea who they were referring to, although I did suspect it was Welbourn only because I Googled "Katee Sackhoff Chiefs" and came up with [http://www.tv.com/katee-sackhoff/person/3140/trivia.html this (scroll down to # 9)]. Not a reliable source, so I didn't link to it in the podcast. -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 13:57, 20 March 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:50, 13 March 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:
	I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)		I'm not sure if I was in the right switching the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki> carriage returns, but generally we avoid html where possible so I just put the returns in. If the breaks look better, we should use <nowiki><br/></nowiki>'s instead (as that is XHTML compliant, or some such). Also, I just want to note that as cool as it is to have David Eick's thoughts too, it makes transcribing a LOT more complicated. There were a couple of fragments that are lost with them talking over each other.--[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 13:57, 13 March 2006 (CST)
	:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)		:OK, sorry about the <nowiki><br>'s</nowiki>. Didn't know there was a <nowiki><br/></nowiki> tag. I'll use the double carriage returns from now on. It does look better with the carriage returns, in my opinion. Thanks! Regarding Eick & RDM simultaneously talking, I concur. This episode's transcription is taking a lot longer to do because of it, and it's one and a half times as long as a regular episode. A bit more laborious and time-consuming, but not insurmountable. Carpal tunnel syndrome, here I come! -- [[User:Laineylain\|Laineylain]] 14:45, 13 March 2006 (CST)

			The current formatting is adequate, in my opinion. There is a standard convention for marking up simultaneous speech in transcript analysis, which I can demonstrate tonight when I have my notes on hand, but it pretty much requires that we switch to a monospace font with fixed column widths, or do some very nasty markup tricks. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 14:50, 13 March 2006 (CST)