(just couldn't resist that one)

Oh no! Hoist on my own petard!

I hate when that happens...

:-)

-CW

I'll never refer to you as a number. Just wanted to be perfectly clear about that. :)

And, I wasn't going to say anything at all ... but ... well, I have to tell it like it is. I learned that from you, you know. :)

Just smaller and more blended... :D

"Yer blended all right.."
-Commander William T Riker, STAR TREK: First Contact

:D

Michale.....

But... but... I worked so hard on them!

Heh.

Anyone else? Numbers? No numbers? Can't change it until the weekend, so let me know in the meantime.

-CW

For everyone, as well -

I couldn't resist poking fun at Herm71, since he's the guy who talked me into Twittering in the first place. I'm one of those Luddites who has be dragged, kicking and screaming into the future. He was actually the first follower on Twitter I ever had, so I thought I'd advertise my Twitterability in a long-winded rant to him. We've had an ongoing debate about the usefulness of Twitter for awhile now, so don't worry, I'm not singling him out in any way, we're buddies.

The moral of the story: don't drink and type.

Heh.

:-)

-CW

What do you say we change the colour of the numbers so that they inconspicuously blend in with the background colour ... that is to say, to match the comment colour, cream or powder blue ... you know, so that the numbers can't be seen. :)

I mean, who among us think numbers are necessary to keep the conversation flowing with this crowd. Unless the numbers are needed for some other reason, I think they should just go away.

Welcome aboard! I think you're gonna like it here.

Might I suggest that you just check in here on at least a daily basis and forget you ever heard about Twitter. :)

I actually just re-checked the txt and noticed the "not date" parenthetical. Didn't even register the first time.

I was thinking of maybe changing the color to brown, as well. What do you think?

-CW

Thanx....

I think... :D

I also agree with Liz that the numbers are a tad big..

Still holding out for Avatars... :D

Not the 10ft tall blue kind, though.. :D

Michale....

I think the big clue for me was when you said DNC. Now that truly is funny!

-David

When Michale is right, he is really right! Just wanted to say that - the opportunity presents itself so rarely anymore, you know. :)

And, if I may suggest ... the comment numbers are the biggest, boldest, brightest thing on the comments ... like they're trying to be the most important thing, or something.

I guess I would just rather refer to everyones name - or, at least, everyone's username - when addressing a comment to them ... rather than using a number ... but, that's just me and I'll get used to them over time, I suppose ... if they get smaller ...

Do you always twitter at the character limit? I don't know how you cope with that kind of restrictive environment and keep your sanity! Or, perhaps you post in multi-part tweets!? :)

No Democratic Party leader could EVER show the good and common sense necessary to make such a completely and utterly "RIGHT" (no pun intended) decision as getting CW on board... :D

Michale.....

You know, it occurs to me to ask....

You aren't one of my Twitter followers, by any possible chance, in other words, those who get instant notice whenever I post a new article (this diversion is a naked and shameless plug, I have to admit, for those of you who are on the brink of jumping into the Twitter revolution {but are yet undecided}, in a cheap attempt to grow the Chris Weigant Twit Army {as I have decided just this second to call them} -- and whose name borrows much, 'tis true, from Craig Ferguson {Twitter: @CraigyFerg} and his Robot Skeleton Army -- BUT {where was I?}, as I always quickly quote {little bit of alliteration to impress the ultra-literate, there, thanks for noticing} when trapped in just such a situation: "Immature humorists borrow, mature humorists steal"; which, as everyone knows, was attributed to Mark Twain {né Samuel Clemens, of course}, although, admittedly, nobody alive today knows if he actually ever uttered the thought [such is the nature of time], but I do try to attribute these things where possible lest I be accused of plaigarism {and we wouldn't want that, it goes without saying} -- so, to conclude and get back on track here, everyone should sign up as a Twitter follower of mine {Twitter: @ChrisWeigant}, although I must admit that the only Twitting I perform {or promise ever to perform} is to post notice of new essays presented here at chrisweigant.com, and you can always be automatically notified of those if you click the "RSS" thingie up in the menu -- assuming of course, that you have figured out how to set up the whole RSS feed automagical situation on your computer, but for those not up on the RSS scheme and who are more modern and up-to-the-hip-minute in their computering, I seriously do invite you all to partake of the wonderfulness that we all can agree comes from following me on Twitter), and who got advance warning that today's column could possibly have something to do with the calendar (for all non-Twits, I posted today's notice {I refuse, on general principles, to call it a "Tweet", personally... more on this subject in a moment, I promise...} as: "New column up (note date) -- http://tinyurl.com/yzb7l49 -- 'My Final Column' #p2" which stuck right in middle of it there has the parenthetical phrase "note date" -- a heavy clue, one must admit, to what would follow linking on the tinyurl link which took you to this very article -- and, in case the non-hip are wondering, that "#p2" bit at the end there signifies this bit of Twitter wisdom was broadcast to the Progressive Twitter community {it is Twitter shorthand for "Progressives 2.0" for those really interested} -- but, to return to our main and current parenthetical thought -- you have to at least admit that I did give the Chris Weigant Twit Army a big rub-your-face-in-it clue, on the grounds that I'm fairly new to Twitter and this particular audience {gotta drive those "eyeballs" to the main site, dontchaknow}, and didn't want to freak any new readers out with the title of today's article itself, which could indeed have led to neophytes in the CW.com universe superficially reading this column's title and jumping to the "well, screw him, he's done" errant conclusion, and thus be tempted to "unfollow" me [I'm not sure that's the correct Twitter term, as I am constrained by the fact that I'm new to it all as well as my serious distaste for the overly-saccharine Twitter terminology {I refuse, once again, to reinforce my earlier comment, to even call them "Tweets" due to this deep personal revulsion at such infantile terminology}, but the term should be clear enough for anyone who knows what "to follow" means, I am supposing], which led me to reluctantly give the Chris Weigant Twit Army {fickle though they may be} any indication that following me in the first place was a stupid idea, but then I have digressed into what Twitter followers would think when this parenthetical thought was originally addressed to non-Twits, so I'll just gracefully end it here), because, really, if you're going to write something like "I got about half-way through your first paragraph before I remembered the date. Nice try." then you really should include some sort of Full Disclosure statement like "After being warned by getting your Tweet [Editorial Note: that was typed with a shudder, I assure everyone] which included the phrase '(note date)'..." don't you think?

Heh. The moral of this story is: As I am able to type a single sentence like the one above, I sneer at 140-character limits. It is to laugh, no?

:-)

-CW

Comment numbers!

Let me know how they look on your various browsers. Unfortunately, it will have to wait until the weekend, if they are causing problems. My programming environment just killed my site file as it crashed (the code's OK, just the environment file... this is way too much information, isn't it?), so it'll be until the weekend until I can make changes again. It crashed in a fairly convenient spot, though, where I had just (kind of) finished the comment numbers. So, if it looks a little cruddy, bear with me for a few days -- and if you think it looks good, too -- let me know either way.

The purpose of the numbers is a kind of poor-man's substitute for true threaded comments. If you want to respond to someone's previous comment, now you can do so by number (that's the idea). Again, let me know what you think.

-CW

"...on this auspicious date..."

Heh.

:-)

-CW

Don't worry. With an act like this, as that learnéd philosopher, Daffy Duck, so memorably said...

"I can only do it once."

Heh. :-)

(I couldn't find the whole script, anyone knows where a script of "Show Biz Bugs" exists, let me know.)

-CW

You got me! You got me GOOD!

Don't ever do that again!

Whew.

Now, excuse me while I catch my breath ...

Don't worry, wouldn't miss it for the world!

-CW

I thought I'd stick the word "foolish" in the second paragraph there, just to raise a red flag, as it were...

:-)

-CW

How I would miss you if this story was true!

Welcome to the site!

and Stan -

"were true"? "chuckle"?

But... but... as I clearly stated:

I certainly have tried to never deceive you in any way in what I have written, right up until today.

Right up until today! So there!

Heh. :-)

-CW

...Stan

Although even you would have trouble with "better word framing" on offshore drilling.