Page 1 of 1

New spoiler policy.

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:32 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
There are two policies that apply, one to short, simple problems, another to long, complicated problems.



1) Short and sweet: put solutions in the puzzle thread hidden by a spoiler tag
Spoiler:
like this.
But please, before posting a solution check to see if others have already posted the same solution.


2) Long and bitter: the puzzle poster should create two threads, one titled "puzzle name" the other titled "puzzle name [solutions]". If you are the first person to respond to a tricky puzzle and it doesn't have a solution thread yet, make it yourself. Please remember to put a link to the other thread in the first post of the thread (ie in the puzzle thread put a link to the solution thread and in the solution thread put a link to the puzzle thread).

Ask questions about the puzzle in the puzzle thread, put answers in the solution thread un-spoilered (that way there will be less possibility of people arriving at the same solutions whilst percieving their contribution to be unique and we can also discuss whether a particular solution is a genuine solution in plain text the way nature intended us to participate on forums).



Feel free to discuss these policies here in this thread. If I like what you're saying I'll change the policy, but I think this will work well.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:47 am UTC
by skeptical scientist
Sounds good. And we have spoiler tags now? Cool! I didn't notice.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:00 am UTC
by jestingrabbit
I didn't notice the spoiler tags either until someone used them.

The rules are just what we do now but written down. I can't imagine that there's a better way to do it, but I'm always open to being shown unimaginably good things.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:14 am UTC
by skeptical scientist
jestingrabbit wrote:I didn't notice the spoiler tags either until someone used them.

The rules are just what we do now but written down. I can't imagine that there's a better way to do it, but I'm always open to being shown unimaginably good things.

Of course, I'm terrible at deciding whether a puzzle is complicated or not, so inevitably create solution threads for puzzles with one line answers and spoilerized answers in puzzles which then generate pages of discussion.

P.S. I'm not sure if the rules thread is the right place for chitchat, so feel free to delete.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:53 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
skeptical scientist wrote:Of course, I'm terrible at deciding whether a puzzle is complicated or not, so inevitably create solution threads for puzzles with one line answers and spoilerized answers in puzzles which then generate pages of discussion.


When in doubt start a solutions thread. Its just so much easier to read for frail old eyes like mine.

skeptical scientist wrote:P.S. I'm not sure if the rules thread is the right place for chitchat, so feel free to delete.


The old version was pretty chatty, I'm happy to have this be the same, until it gets annoying and inane. Then I'll probably lock, delete and mail incendiary devices.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:21 am UTC
by 4=5
Spoiler:
if we hide our chitchat in spoiler tags would it matter if it is inane and annoying?

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:01 am UTC
by jestingrabbit
Yes, yes it would.

PS I think you need to put the colour tag inside the spoiler tag
Spoiler:
like this
to get that effect.

So, does this work?
Spoiler:
ab
Yes, yes it does.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:48 am UTC
by Nimz
jestingrabbit wrote:PS I think you need to put the colour tag inside the spoiler tag
Spoiler:
like this
to get that effect.

It should be noted that there are two schemes now. White inside spoiler tags isn't invisible in the other scheme. By trial and error I found [color=#E4ECEF] and [color=#EBF0F5] are pretty close to invisible (whether spoilered or not) in the traditionally light and dark posts, respectively, when using the other scheme. Haven't checked when in the context of a quote, but that'll probably be another [color=#XXXXXX]. :? In the event any of that info is useful, yay! Otherwise, it's trivia (e.g. for if you get bored memorizing digits of [insert favorite irrational constant here]).

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:36 pm UTC
by Cheese
Nimz wrote:By trial and error I found [color=#E4ECEF] and [color=#EBF0F5] are pretty close to invisible (whether spoilered or not) in the traditionally light and dark posts, respectively, when using the other scheme. Haven't checked when in the context of a quote, but that'll probably be another [color=#XXXXXX].


Edit the HTML of a page and you can find the exact #RRGGBB values. It'll require a little hunting, but is much easier than trial and error.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:31 pm UTC
by Token
Or, if you're me (and if you aren't, bad luck), you have a short program mapped to your F10 key that instantly tells you the RGB color (and x-y coordinates) of whichever pixel your cursor is at. The dark posts are #DCDCE5 and the light ones are #ECECEC.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:39 pm UTC
by Torn Apart By Dingos
Token wrote:Or, if you're me (and if you aren't, bad luck), you have a short program mapped to your F10 key that instantly tells you the RGB color (and x-y coordinates) of whichever pixel your cursor is at. The dark posts are #DCDCE5 and the light ones are #ECECEC.

Hey, that's useful. Want to share it?

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:08 am UTC
by phlip
xmag will do it, I've got it mapped to one of my keyboard's media buttons... use it all the time.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:24 am UTC
by jestingrabbit
I think you guys are assuming everyone's using the same style, which might not be true.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:44 pm UTC
by Token
Torn Apart By Dingos wrote:
Token wrote:Or, if you're me (and if you aren't, bad luck), you have a short program mapped to your F10 key that instantly tells you the RGB color (and x-y coordinates) of whichever pixel your cursor is at. The dark posts are #DCDCE5 and the light ones are #ECECEC.

Hey, that's useful. Want to share it?

Well, I would, but it's not an .exe. It's a code file that runs through the compiler. I could find out how to actually compile it, but I'm too lazy for that kind of thing.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:32 pm UTC
by Torn Apart By Dingos
What? You mean it's a script? Share the code.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:16 pm UTC
by Nimz
jestingrabbit wrote:I think you guys are assuming everyone's using the same style, which might not be true.
Which is exactly the point of my comment. In the normal scheme (style), I am ready to believe DCDCE5 and ECECEC are perfect matches for the background of posts, but in the other scheme, light and dark are reversed and DCDCE5 and ECECEC don't match the background anymore.
Nimz wrote:It should be noted that there are two schemes now. White inside spoiler tags isn't invisible in the other scheme. By trial and error I found [color=#E4ECEF] and [color=#EBF0F5] are pretty close to invisible (whether spoilered or not) in the traditionally light and dark posts, respectively, when using the other scheme.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:23 am UTC
by jestingrabbit
Absolutely. It just seemed that people were ignoring your reality and substituting their own. Apologies for confusion.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:18 am UTC
by quintopia
If you don't like spoilers, you could randomly alternate which of the two colors to use, such that the text is partially invisible but illegible in either scheme. But spoiler tags are so much easier. . .

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 8:19 am UTC
by darkmatter
Token wrote:
Torn Apart By Dingos wrote:
Token wrote:Or, if you're me (and if you aren't, bad luck), you have a short program mapped to your F10 key that instantly tells you the RGB color (and x-y coordinates) of whichever pixel your cursor is at. The dark posts are #DCDCE5 and the light ones are #ECECEC.

Hey, that's useful. Want to share it?

Well, I would, but it's not an .exe. It's a code file that runs through the compiler. I could find out how to actually compile it, but I'm too lazy for that kind of thing.


Or, if you have almost any paint program in existence today, you could:

1 alt+printscreen to copy the page
2 paste it into a paint program
3 use the Eyedropper to copy the color for your own use
4 use the color editor to see the RGB Hex values

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:10 am UTC
by Arancaytar
Or if you are one of the countless users of Firefox, ColorZilla will tell you the color of any point in a web page, including images.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:12 pm UTC
by MFHodge
Since there are two different styles available for the forum (and potentially more in the future), coloring your text is not a great idea for a spoiler. It might look fine for you, but have no effect for many other people.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
by Random832
"show all spoilers" bookmarket for firefox:

Code: Select all

javascript:(function(){if(!window.$spoil) {var x=document.createElement('STYLE'); x.textContent='.quotecontent>div{display:block!important}'; document.getElementsByTagName('HEAD')[0].appendChild(x); $spoil=x.sheet} else {$spoil.disabled=!$spoil.disabled}})();


Spoilers will not hide while it is in effect. Click again to deactivate.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:28 am UTC
by Nimz
Nothing to see here.
Well, there is another way to make text unreadable, but I think there might be some that would object to the widespread use of it.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:13 am UTC
by phlip
Nimz wrote:Well, there is another way to make text unreadable, but I think there might be some that would object to the widespread use of it.

Not to mention the fact that it (a) doesn't work when quoted, (b) doesn't work for people using subSilver.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:09 am UTC
by Nimz
phlip wrote:
Nimz wrote:Well, there is another way to make text unreadable, but I think there might be some that would find the widespread use of it objectionable.

Not to mention the fact that it (a) doesn't work when quoted, (b) doesn't work for people using subSilver.

I was actually alluding to something else in that post - I'm not so dense as to not notice VTMFHodge's post just barely above my own. I am perfectly content with coloured text, and I don't see why anyone wouldn't be. I'm not referring to micro text, either - I had my browser set a minimum font size, so size spoiling is easily vanquished. This is also vanquished by LTB. Final hint: I've (re)worded all of my sentences in this message to (very) obliquely reference the "other" way to make text unreadable, and I'll be keeping tabs on whether anyone knows what I'm talking about (and if so, whether it's safe for widespread use) ... 'nuff said.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:14 pm UTC
by Random832
Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
Random832 wrote:Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?

Now do mathematical equations.

And anyway, there is a spoiler tag. It works
Spoiler:
like this.
Just highlight the text you want spoilered and press the button above the edit window. Its easy. It works. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:38 pm UTC
by Random832
jestingrabbit wrote:
Random832 wrote:Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?

Now do mathematical equations.

[zngu]\fhz_{v=z}^a k_v = k_z + k_{z+1} + k_{z+2} +\pqbgf+ k_{a-1} + k_a.[/zngu]

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:49 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
I just made the strangling motion with my hands.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:59 pm UTC
by ehird
Nimz wrote:
phlip wrote:
Nimz wrote:Well, there is another way to make text unreadable, but I think there might be some that would find the widespread use of it objectionable.

Not to mention the fact that it (a) doesn't work when quoted, (b) doesn't work for people using subSilver.

I was actually alluding to something else in that post - I'm not so dense as to not notice VTMFHodge's post just barely above my own. I am perfectly content with coloured text, and I don't see why anyone wouldn't be. I'm not referring to micro text, either - I had my browser set a minimum font size, so size spoiling is easily vanquished. This is also vanquished by LTB. Final hint: I've (re)worded all of my sentences in this message to (very) obliquely reference the "other" way to make text unreadable, and I'll be keeping tabs on whether anyone knows what I'm talking about (and if so, whether it's safe for widespread use) ... 'nuff said.

Fnord snape kills dumbledore fnord.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:53 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
I don't have much time... I suspect that the raptors are already circling my house as we speak (FOOL, those large bay windows... you laughed at the warnings, and now where are you...). I... I just wanted to say that resistance is possible, that the unlocked forums can still be bastions of freedom and good sense. This reign of terror... someone must alert Randal... someone must alert The Military. They must be stopped. THEY MUST BE STOPPED.

Oh, and spoiler your solutions please.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:42 pm UTC
by Lord Aurora
Spoiler:
I miss you jr :(

edit:
Spoiler:
although I have to applaud the LP (and, I'm assuming, Math/Science/etc) forum for keeping sane through the shitshow

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:49 pm UTC
by teelo
Thread should be renamed "spoiler policy" since it isn't new anymore.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:58 pm UTC
by dotproduct
teelo wrote:Thread should be renamed "spoiler policy" since it isn't new anymore.

I agree. Very much.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:46 pm UTC
by jestingrabbit
meh.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:45 pm UTC
by MasterOfAll
the once and future spoiler policy? (also, the one *you* you you you should be following. I'm looking at you, you who tend to not bother reading stuff!)

sounds a bit wordy to me . . . I think jestingrabbit has it summed up nicely. Not that my opinion matters, but somehow I felt . . . compelled . . . to post here.

tl;dr - hem

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 2:46 pm UTC
by Freddino18
Random832 wrote:Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?


Twusmkw lzsl osk OSQ lgg wskq lg vwugvw.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 3:49 pm UTC
by Soupspoon
Freddino18 wrote:
Random832 wrote:Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?

Twusmkw lzsl osk OSQ lgg wskq lg vwugvw.

Kg ak qgmjk. Lzw hgafl twafy lzsl al'k gtxmkuslwv. Sdlzgmyz, oalz hjsulauw, qgmdwsjf lg jwsv al sfqosq oalzgml emuz wxxgjl. (Sdd lzak vgfw tq zsfv. Myz!)

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:01 pm UTC
by Freddino18
Soupspoon wrote:
Freddino18 wrote:
Random832 wrote:Jul abg jevgr fcbvyre grkg yvxr guvf?

Twusmkw lzsl osk OSQ lgg wskq lg vwugvw.

Kg ak qgmjk. Lzw hgafl twafy lzsl al'k gtxmkuslwv. Sdlzgmyz, oalz hjsulauw, qgmdwsjf lg jwsv al sfqosq oalzgml emuz wxxgjl. (Sdd lzak vgfw tq zsfv. Myz!)

Tm extlm b wbwg'm nlx max wxytnem wxvkrimbhg dxr.

Re: New spoiler policy.

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:53 am UTC
by Soupspoon
<ROT26>I think we're going off topic, as the solving of a spoilered solution to a logic puzzle isn't meant to be a logic puzzle in and of itself. The default key is fine enough, if not overkill.</ROT26>
<TRIPLEROT26>But just to give you a challenge, I'm using a couple of lesser known but increasingly sophisticated encryption keys in this reply.</TRIPLEROT26>