by Patrick ➕follow (61) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 409 - 448 of 510 Next » Last » Search these comments
When opening up a reply or a post, I think there should be instructions (maybe just a link to open to a new page) explaining how to do stuff.
Like for Rumble, that's weird, to embed the video takes a little more effort. Perhaps explaining how to embed videos, highlight text, etc.
richwicks says
When opening up a reply or a post, I think there should be instructions (maybe just a link to open to a new page) explaining how to do stuff.
Like for Rumble, that's weird, to embed the video takes a little more effort. Perhaps explaining how to embed videos, highlight text, etc.
can videos be posted here? i have short clips, but i don’t think they’ll post due to size maybe
can videos be posted here? i have short clips, but i don’t think they’ll post due to size maybe
When opening up a reply or a post
richwicks says
When opening up a reply or a post
richwicks What do you mean by "opening up a reply or post"?
Do you mean editing it?
I have a ton of predictions here, I want to see where I was wrong and how OTHER people were wrong. I noticed I could edit a prediction from years ago. I didn't do it, I KNOW you can detect it, I want you to disallow it.
So I loaded up lots of threads from patnet to read and realized I was the only one in the area who had a light on - my phone.
just_passing_through
It's a good idea, and I added it at the top of my patrick.net todo list.
If anyone knows CSS well enough to send me a viable sample of how to do it, I'd be grateful for it. I can figure it out, but it will take me a bit. CSS is my weak point.
richwicks Thanks for this.
The downside is that I would need to allow script tags from Twitter, which would give them absolute control over patrick.net, including the ability to read and report back anything on that page, and the ability to alter or censor content.
All 3rd party javascript can read and change anything on the page where it is included. I was just complaining about this issue on tax prep websites:
https://patrick.net/post/1381117/2024-04-03-taxact-and-taxhawk-give-google-open
i am so [url=https://hiphoploadz.com/j-cole-ready-24-feat-camron-2/][url] impressed by your thought please write a new one check out for mine
Others can argue about those ideas, backed by other facts, different evidence, articles from other sources, and shit they make up.
Suggestion: You don't have to use the ignore button. It is very easy to skim through known bull-shitter's posts.
Ignores; Me and a bunch of others have 4; Patrick and another large group has 2. Some old time posters have 1 or 3; My favorites Woo Wizard Ceffer has 14; TPB has 12 and meme master Booger has 8.
Some people like to use the ignore button to punish.
Most ignores I have on me happened when I warned that Ukraine was going to lose against Russia, and that Russia wasn't entirely unjustified in the war.
I was right, but how dare I be right?
And I bet a lot them no longer come to PatNet because you were proven right.
Yo Patrick
The stupid CA link tax just passed the Assembly.
Newsom is expected to sign it if it passes the Senate.
Is PatNet effected? If so, you plan to yank all the links to news articles like Google is doing?
I don't get it. I just see the whole thing as terribly tragic and preventable and Ukraine would win or lose no matter what I thought. Douglas Macgregor says it's like 300,000 Ukrainians dead, I hope that's not right.
I shouldn't have to explain why Russia already lost.
Usually such laws are limited to large websites.
But also, isn't it an overt violation of the First Amendment for any law to restrict what I can link to?
Preventable. Russia was the invader.
Macgregor is a dip shit and has been proven wrong for 3 years.
That's the last person I'd bring up with Russia/Ukraine. Anyone that even mentions that dumb fucks name needs their head checked.
Ukraine won't "win" this assault on them. Russia has lost it in the long game.
WookieMan says
I shouldn't have to explain why Russia already lost.
WookieMan please explain it to me. I think Russia is clearly winning.
Suggestion: You don't have to use the ignore button. It is very easy to skim through known bull-shitter's posts. Occasionally they have something wise, entertaining, or informative to share. But do your own research and fact check those motherfuckers because they often spew made up shit.
WookieMan says
I shouldn't have to explain why Russia already lost.
WookieMan please explain it to me. I think Russia is clearly winning.
« First « Previous Comments 409 - 448 of 510 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,252,010 comments by 14,932 users - Booger, Ceffer, DOGEWontAmountToShit, WookieMan online now