123:
created is a good step in the right direction. However, if you are to overcome the nay-sayers, then you have to pare away anything that gives the impression that the box is to do anything other than to offer selected information: in this case you need to get rid of the colour, and the intent to make the result "pretty". "Elegant" might be a better target to aim for. What you would then be left with is something that people don't use to adorn their user page and make it look "pretty", but something that allows people to make statements (in a uniform, elegant way) that furthers their intent to declare where they are coming from in their contribution to the
Knowledge (XXG) project.
122:
I thought you were on to something, but then you talk about "colourful" and "pretty". I think that the intent to have a simple, common representation of interests, facts and biases is not in itself a bad thing, and may indeed have positive benefits. As such, a tabular box of the type that you have
81:
Thanks for the clarification. While many
Userboxes look very nice, I actually think the lists are kind of "pretty" as they stand (be sure to see the List on my user page, which is a bit more colorful than the sample on the List page.) I'm sure people will "run with" the idea and make them into
54:
Sorry. That sounded much worse than it meant to... Had just read another debate in which thing were arbritrarily deleted. If these got even a fraction of the attention that userboxes are getting then I'm sure they'll end up pretty too.
160:
I have to compliement you on this great idea. I just finished replacing all my old userboxes with this nice list, and it not only looks cleaner, it's a great way to get around that whole crazy usebox controversy.
139:
There's certainly nothing wrong with elegant. Colours may not be for everyone, and one can always take out the color tags if one prefers. Thanks for your feedback!
41:
Well, okay. Thank's for sharing that. I guess some people just enjoy endlessly fighting over these "good looking" boxes. I prefer to offer other solutions.
173:
I very much appreciate your comments. You've created a very colorful and interesting List and have helped prove its value! Thanks again. -
82:
something even more creative. I hope. They could end up as polemical and divisive as the
Userboxes have turned out (pretty as they are.)
143:
103:
86:
65:
56:
32:
17:
177:
167:
147:
131:
107:
90:
68:
59:
45:
35:
128:
99:, which you mention your User page, DOES look very beautiful. I'd love to visit one day.
174:
140:
100:
83:
42:
162:
124:
96:
31:
These might be a solution. Except that userboxes actually look good...
64:And thanks for offering a constructive solution.
8:
7:
24:
1:
108:07:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
91:07:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
69:06:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
60:06:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
46:05:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
36:05:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
194:
148:19:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
132:17:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
95:Also: Speaking of pretty,
178:21:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
168:21:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
27:Not quite there yet
145:
105:
88:
18:User talk:Nhprman
185:
144:
104:
87:
193:
192:
188:
187:
186:
184:
183:
182:
158:
120:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
191:
189:
181:
180:
157:
154:
153:
152:
151:
150:
119:
116:
115:
114:
113:
112:
111:
110:
93:
74:
73:
72:
71:
66:Mostlyharmless
62:
57:Mostlyharmless
49:
48:
33:Mostlyharmless
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
190:
179:
176:
172:
171:
170:
169:
166:
165:
155:
149:
146:
142:
138:
137:
136:
135:
134:
133:
130:
126:
117:
109:
106:
102:
98:
94:
92:
89:
85:
80:
79:
78:
77:
76:
75:
70:
67:
63:
61:
58:
53:
52:
51:
50:
47:
44:
40:
39:
38:
37:
34:
26:
19:
163:
159:
121:
101:User:Nhprman
84:User:Nhprman
30:
97:Wellington
175:Nhprman
156:Thanks!
141:Nhprman
43:Nhprman
164:gadren
125:Noisy
118:Hmmmm
16:<
129:Talk
161:--
127:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.