Intermittens Numbers

[the last yatto]

no payback required, i only pointed out the flawed nature of it

[Jasper]

We can just tell them that the missing issues are super rare and coated in shiny foil.

I think doing issue numbers out of order might give us a laugh for a day or two, but very soon we, and more importantly the readers, won't be laughing.

This.

Explain.

I can see that the way I posted that might not be clear. Sorry about that. Let me rephrase it.

Doing things like telling them that the missing issues are super rare and coated in shiny foil might give us a laugh for a day or two, but very soon we, and more importantly the readers, won't be laughing.

Why's that?

[the last yatto]

I think Scribus makes the most sense - everyone has easy access (yay open source!)

my tux hates it,
checking for Qt... configure: error: Qt (>= Qt 3.3) (headers and libraries) not found. Please check your installation!
For more details about this problem, look at the end of config.log. EVEN IF YOU DONT KNOW WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR


i assume its quick time but wasnt sure

[Triple Zero]

not QT is some kind of user interface thingy library in linux.

mainly it means yr tux sux

[Cramulus]

We can just tell them that the missing issues are super rare and coated in shiny foil.

I think doing issue numbers out of order might give us a laugh for a day or two, but very soon we, and more importantly the readers, won't be laughing.

This.

Explain.

I can see that the way I posted that might not be clear. Sorry about that. Let me rephrase it.

Doing things like telling them that the missing issues are super rare and coated in shiny foil might give us a laugh for a day or two, but very soon we, and more importantly the readers, won't be laughing.

Why's that?

speaking for myself--

is it really that funny to have the issues printed out of order? I can see it earning a chuckle if someone turns up at the forum and asks when issue 11 is coming out, and then we get to laugh at him for not getting it, but I think the overall funnay is limited.

Having the issues in order is useful - it helps people who are collecting them. It helps people track the progression and evolution of the magazine. It will ultimately bring all these random issues by different editors under the same ceiling.

also, when random numbering it stops being funny, we still have to live with our editorial decisions.


so I think it's one of those times that Order will be more useful than Disorder.



there are other ways to prank the readers.. like maybe have an issue whose cover states the theme is THE ALL NUDE ISSUE but then it's actually the BEARDED MEN IN LOBSTER SUITS ISSUE.

[AFK]

So I think this is the compromise.  Issues are numbered as they are published, not as they are initiated.  The exception I think would be issue #5 since it's supposed to be the Law of Fives issue. 

So perhaps we should stop numbering the initiation of an issue, because speaking for myself, the pressure to produce something I'm not being paid for and that is time consuming kinda sucks.  Yes, I know I took it on, but just the same, if someone else is afforded the time to throw something together faster, they shouldn't be held up because we think that just because one was started before the other, that it has to be published before the other.  Am I making sense? 

[LMNO]

Howabout a compromise?


"Issue 1: First in a series."
"Issue 2: Second in a series."
"Issue 7: Third in a series."
"Issue 4: Withdrawn for legal reasons."
"Issue 5: Fifth in a series (OMG PINEAL)."
"Issue 12: Sixth in a series."
"Issue 8: Seventh in a series."
"Issue 6: Eighth in a series."



This way, we can represent both the order it was published, and the order in which we thought it up.

[Reginald Ret]

RWHN is riding the correct motorcycle.

[Telarus]

So I think this is the compromise.  Issues are numbered as they are published, not as they are initiated.  The exception I think would be issue #5 since it's supposed to be the Law of Fives issue. 

So perhaps we should stop numbering the initiation of an issue, because speaking for myself, the pressure to produce something I'm not being paid for and that is time consuming kinda sucks.  Yes, I know I took it on, but just the same, if someone else is afforded the time to throw something together faster, they shouldn't be held up because we think that just because one was started before the other, that it has to be published before the other.  Am I making sense? 

This. Although I do like the current cascade of topics, and some of the occultnick-lulz in the numbering. On the other hand, STEP IT UP PEOPLES, and you get a low Issue_#. Then we can start cracking SNLish jokes about who got where first like Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin do.

[Sheered Völva]

Howabout a compromise?


"Issue 1: First in a series."
"Issue 2: Second in a series."
"Issue 7: Third in a series."
"Issue 4: Withdrawn for legal reasons."
"Issue 5: Fifth in a series (OMG PINEAL)."
"Issue 12: Sixth in a series."
"Issue 8: Seventh in a series."
"Issue 6: Eighth in a series."



This way, we can represent both the order it was published, and the order in which we thought it up.

With all due respect to LMNO, no.

I still get irked at George Lucas every time I try to explain which Star Wars movie I'm talking about (Well, you see, it's episode IV meaning it's the 1st movie, except really it wasn't called episode IV at first). But while Star Wars movies aren't numbered in the order they came out, the numbers are at least in chronological order for the series' timeline. Giving each Intermittens issue two numbers to me is worse than giving them no numbers at all. But that's just my opinion.

[Sheered Völva]

So I think this is the compromise.  Issues are numbered as they are published, not as they are initiated.  The exception I think would be issue #5 since it's supposed to be the Law of Fives issue. 

So perhaps we should stop numbering the initiation of an issue, because speaking for myself, the pressure to produce something I'm not being paid for and that is time consuming kinda sucks.  Yes, I know I took it on, but just the same, if someone else is afforded the time to throw something together faster, they shouldn't be held up because we think that just because one was started before the other, that it has to be published before the other.  Am I making sense? 

Yes.

[the last yatto]

rly the url was that simple
http://www.qtsoftware.com 
so much for working on something when i had days off

[the last yatto]

"Issue 4: Withdrawn for legal reasons."

shouldnt this be issue 3 with 4 being the O SHIT WUT