• duder (unregistered)

    The first 'booking' form has a picture of a Star Wars X-wing fighter and another picture of a floating eye. I don't know what kind of 'courses' they offer booking for, but I bet they're freaking awesome.

    Also, at the very bottom is says '50% of booking fees are payable with this booking application.' The next line is cutoff, but I bet is says something like: 'please send your credit card number and expiration date to the e-mail address listed above.'

  • nemo (unregistered) in reply to Markp
    Markp:
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.
    That's OK. Once you've printed it out, you can type in the missing fields on your typewriter.

  • But, I am a Robot (unregistered) in reply to blindio
    blindio:
    Actually, if you look at the Recycled Computer image, everything is typewritten except for the x in "Chair Approved this Request" which is inked in, and then it looks like the dept chair initialed it. Think of all the WTFs on this site where we all laughed heartily at people not willing to lift a finger unless *all* the paperwork was completely in place. Seems to me that the individual wanted to make sure there would not be questions about the Chair approval.
    So bureaucracy is TRWTF
  • E.S. (unregistered) in reply to Adriano

    Actually, that sounds quite optimal. People do this all the time for research papers, and various other documents, etc.

    Sorry, but unless you do it for a living, drawing with a mouse fucking sucks ass -- the design/document markup tools suck ass and not many people own a tablet -- so printing it out and scanning it back in is a lowest cost, most human, solution to what is a basic deficiency in current computer software/hardware.

  • (cs) in reply to amischiefr
    amischiefr:
    So what? So they don't have FireFox with Snapshot, so they didn't want to do a Ctrl + Alt + Print Scrn and paste it into Paint.
    Why would they press ctrl?
  • dolor (unregistered) in reply to Havstein
    Havstein:
    amischiefr:
    So what? So they don't have FireFox with Snapshot, so they didn't want to do a Ctrl + Alt + Print Scrn and paste it into Paint.
    Why would they press ctrl?
    To take control of the situation? All jokes aside, it's my favorite key, I like to press as much as possible. It makes my computer do funny things...
  • Here's a nickel, kid... (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    I've had a customer who, when asked for a list of changes to make to a website's layout:
    • used printscreen to get captures
    • printed those snapshots
    • highlighted the areas and penciled the changes to make
    • scanned the result
    • sent that to me via email

    That day we laughed a lot. Before the crying started, that is.

    Great troll, terrific entertainment value.

  • (cs) in reply to strictnein
    strictnein:
    Never tried to click a link on a piece of paper, but I definitely have tried to hit CTRL-Z while I was in my high school art class. Was doing a lot of photoshop work at home, and I made a mistake on my "beautiful" painting of a red pepper, and my left hand instinctively tried to hit undo on my desk.
    Yeah, we've all tried to save something we just wrote down. It's another thing entirely when you think users are going to click the printed link and get confused at the result. Just what does he expect to happen?

    [post attempt 2]

  • Kittens Make The Best Salsa (unregistered) in reply to Carl
    Carl:
    when we print this on the paper we make sure to disable the link
    But when I got one of those letters the link was still blue and underlined! Which is more than I can say for the links on certain sites these days...

    Well someone must've found a way to click it 'cause they've all gone purple now.

  • nobody (unregistered) in reply to Markp
    Markp:
    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.
    You know, it's people like you who make me wish it was legal to stab pedantic assholes.
  • nobody (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    Anon:
    What's so odd about someone printing out and mailing a form? I've had customers who, to reply to an email, print out the email, write their reply on the email, scan the reply, and then send it back to us as an attachment.
    I've had a customer who, when asked for a list of changes to make to a website's layout:
    • used printscreen to get captures
    • printed those snapshots
    • highlighted the areas and penciled the changes to make
    • scanned the result
    • sent that to me via email

    That day we laughed a lot. Before the crying started, that is.

    What exactly is wrong with that? Some (a lot) people are better drawing on paper than in an image editor. I think you're just a condescending prick. I hope they fired you.

  • stu (unregistered)

    I'll also mail Central-UK my job application. I have a hunch I'll be their web designer guru god!

  • Roman (unregistered)

    A little off-topic, the last item reminded me about some search that I failed recently:

    My wife finished her dissertation, and would like to publish it as a book, and for that she has to send the manuscript to many different publishers.

    Almost none of them accept a soft-copy, so we need to prints a few tens of copies of a 300-pages document and mail it to them.

    Since most of the potential publishers are in the US, and we live abroad, I figured it's silly expensive and slow to print the copies here and mail them all over the ocean- it would make much more sense to email a copy, print it there and mail it locally.

    Can anyone recommend a "print and mail services" company in US ?

    I tried to Google a few, and most of them seem to deal with much larger batches, mostly printing color fliers. Out of a few I contacted asking for a quote only one reply to make sure they understand what I want, and never gave a quite.

    Thanks.

  • (cs) in reply to Mike
    Mike:
    The guy:
    Ben:
    From the page:
    <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage Express 2.0">

    says it all really...

    Yea, I didn't look at it very closely. Didn't want a migraine, but I think that you correctly identified TRWTF in that one...

    Maybe TRWTF is that the site says copyright 1996, but FrontPage Express 2.0 was released in 1997?

    So? Windows 7 hasn't yet been released but my colleagues and I have been running it for weeks.

  • Falcon (unregistered) in reply to campkev
    campkev:
    Markp:
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.

    Geez, what terrible grammar. It's impossibler not more impossible

    You're both wrong - it's actually possimpible!

  • bigbird (unregistered) in reply to Falcon
    Falcon:
    campkev:
    Markp:
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.

    Geez, what terrible grammar. It's impossibler not more impossible

    You're both wrong - it's actually possimpible!

    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

  • (cs) in reply to bigbird
    bigbird:
    Falcon:
    campkev:
    Markp:
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.

    Geez, what terrible grammar. It's impossibler not more impossible

    You're both wrong - it's actually possimpible!

    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

    possimpiblest +1 beat that

  • cyborg (unregistered) in reply to bigbird
    bigbird:
    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

    The mathematics of the statement is irrelevant - it conveys emphasis.

    I fail to see why Grammar Nazis think that no-one should have any fun with language.

  • (cs) in reply to Needle-Threader
    Needle-Threader:
    TRWTF is that Central-UK offer 3D *WEB* design

    Looking at the copyright date on their site, 1996, VRML was still considered interesting as a web technology back then. At least by some people. I think it had pretty much died a death by the end of the 90s.

    Although poking Wikipedia, I see it lives on in the form of X3D.

  • NobodySpecial (unregistered)

    Wouldn't the real WTF be requiring somebody to fill in an online form to request a computer with network access?

    And how would your dept chair approve an online form?

    Would they have to be the one that clicks the checkbox?

    Perhaps they could digitaly sign the form and type in the encrypted message digest?

    Perhaps you could fill in the form online and then the server could print it out and mail it to the dept head so they could sign it, keep a copy for file and mail you back the signed version?

  • C (unregistered) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    strictnein:
    Never tried to click a link on a piece of paper, but I definitely have tried to hit CTRL-Z while I was in my high school art class. Was doing a lot of photoshop work at home, and I made a mistake on my "beautiful" painting of a red pepper, and my left hand instinctively tried to hit undo on my desk.
    Yeah, we've all tried to save something we just wrote down. It's another thing entirely when you think users are going to click the printed link and get confused at the result. Just what does he expect to happen?
    Not really... There's no need to further "save" something you have already written down. It cannot be wiped by a sudden blackout or electrical surge, and there's always the option of photocopying for backup. So why would you "try" it?
  • Techpaul (unregistered) in reply to Mike

    The guy: Ben: From the page:

    <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage Express 2.0">

    says it all really...

    Yea, I didn't look at it very closely. Didn't want a migraine, but I think that you correctly identified TRWTF in that one...

    Maybe TRWTF is that the site says copyright 1996, but FrontPage Express 2.0 was released in 1997?

    Yes but I think they stopped doing courses as clicking on the Schedule button shows course for Decemeber through March of ANY year!

  • (cs) in reply to amischiefr
    amischiefr:
    So what? So they don't have FireFox with Snapshot, so they didn't want to do a Ctrl + Alt + Print Scrn and paste it into Paint. So you made fun of a non tech person who gave you the desired changed, but it wasn't in the form you wanted? Pathetic. I hope they are reading this and decide not to do work with you anymore.

    To you, and all the other smartasses, first: thanks for wishing me out of my job. It hasn't worked so far, and I doubt it will in the future. But it might be nice to spew bile on the web to random strangers, I'd have to try that sometime.

    Second: The non-tech person you talk about could have stopped at printing the pages, then penciling the changes, then sending them to me via snail mail, so the actual changes they wanted were readable (that they were unreadable in the final digital copy was something the same client apologized for). The 'let's scan this back, acknowledge it's useless, and email it back' was the sad-funny part. At least for me.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make clear that the penciled changes scanned back in were in black and white and utterly unreadable, so that I had to call the client and ask what they wanted. I'll try to improve on that next time.

  • Ouch! (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    amischiefr:
    So what? So they don't have FireFox with Snapshot, so they didn't want to do a Ctrl + Alt + Print Scrn and paste it into Paint. So you made fun of a non tech person who gave you the desired changed, but it wasn't in the form you wanted? Pathetic. I hope they are reading this and decide not to do work with you anymore.

    To you, and all the other smartasses, first: thanks for wishing me out of my job. It hasn't worked so far, and I doubt it will in the future. But it might be nice to spew bile on the web to random strangers, I'd have to try that sometime.

    Second: The non-tech person you talk about could have stopped at printing the pages, then penciling the changes, then sending them to me via snail mail, so the actual changes they wanted were readable (that they were unreadable in the final digital copy was something the same client apologized for). The 'let's scan this back, acknowledge it's useless, and email it back' was the sad-funny part. At least for me.

    So you should have included that in your summary. Also, you wouldn't have made such a bad impression then.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make clear that the penciled changes scanned back in were in black and white and utterly unreadable, so that I had to call the client and ask what they wanted. I'll try to improve on that next time.
    Very good.
  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to bigbird
    bigbird:
    Falcon:
    campkev:
    Markp:
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    A further WTF is that (at least on FF) when you copy and paste the contents, what you typed into the fields doesn't get copied. So not only are the instructions moronic, they're also broken. Actually, they say to "cut and paste" which is even more impossible.

    Geez, what terrible grammar. It's impossibler not more impossible

    You're both wrong - it's actually possimpible!

    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

    Of course it can, impossibler and possimpible are both perfectly cromulent.

  • bigbird (unregistered) in reply to cyborg
    cyborg:
    bigbird:
    You're all wrong - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

    The mathematics of the statement is irrelevant - it conveys emphasis.

    I fail to see why Grammar Nazis think that no-one should have any fun with language.

    I agree. But what's that got to do with my comment?

    Or are people serious about sarcasm/humour/witicism tags on here?

  • (cs) in reply to T604
    T604:
    Easiest way to format printed output is HTML? Really? wtf are you smoking.

    Clearly it's LaTeX.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to bigbird
    bigbird:
    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another

    Short answer: Whooooooosh over his head.

    Long answer: That's the difference between computer languages and human languages. On the computer, language must be precise and meticulously accurate. In human language, we have things called "idioms" and "figures of speech" and "jokes" that are not literally accurate but are intended to convey an impression.

    I suppose you're still wondering why anyone needed to explain that the chicken crossed the road in order to get to the other side.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    To you, and all the other smartasses, first: thanks for wishing me out of my job. It hasn't worked so far, and I doubt it will in the future. But it might be nice to spew bile on the web to random strangers, I'd have to try that sometime.

    Second: The non-tech person you talk about could have stopped at printing the pages, then penciling the changes, then sending them to me via snail mail, so the actual changes they wanted were readable (that they were unreadable in the final digital copy was something the same client apologized for). The 'let's scan this back, acknowledge it's useless, and email it back' was the sad-funny part. At least for me.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make clear that the penciled changes scanned back in were in black and white and utterly unreadable, so that I had to call the client and ask what they wanted. I'll try to improve on that next time.

    The other day I was walking down the street when I passed this guy and I decided that I didn't like the look on his face, so I beat him senseless.

    Oh, someone says that gives them a bad impression of me? You say I should be arrested for assault? Oh, well, perhaps I should also mention that when I say I didn't like the look on his face, I mean the look that he gave me as he was trying to plunge a knife into my chest. And when I say I "beat him senseless", what of course I meant was that I pushed him away and ran.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make the story clear. Sheesh, you people jump to conclusions.

  • Design Pattern (unregistered) in reply to The guy
    The guy:
    It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows...

    Spot-on! This is what archive.org has to say about the issue: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    The first entry in the archive is from Jun 23, 2004. It is: http://web.archive.org/web/20040623062857/http://www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm Called "Online Booking Form" instead of "Booking Form" for a reason: It's a regular form with a submit button.

    The link under "RCAD multimedia" is "mailto:[email protected]" (now it is "mailto:[email protected]").

    And does have "RCAD multimedia" its own webpage? Yes, here it is: http://www.cleasby.net/

    Note the title!

    And of course the slogan: "Helping you get what you really want from the Internet."

    (did not found any porn there...)

  • (cs) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    The other day I was walking down the street when I passed this guy and I decided that I didn't like the look on his face, so I beat him senseless.

    Oh, someone says that gives them a bad impression of me? You say I should be arrested for assault? Oh, well, perhaps I should also mention that when I say I didn't like the look on his face, I mean the look that he gave me as he was trying to plunge a knife into my chest. And when I say I "beat him senseless", what of course I meant was that I pushed him away and ran.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make the story clear. Sheesh, you people jump to conclusions.

    Funny, that. Keep up the good work.

  • (cs) in reply to strictnein
    strictnein:
    Never tried to click a link on a piece of paper, but I definitely have tried to hit CTRL-Z while I was in my high school art class. Was doing a lot of photoshop work at home, and I made a mistake on my "beautiful" painting of a red pepper, and my left hand instinctively tried to hit undo on my desk.

    I can't tell you how often I've looked at a table of contents in a book and instinctively thought of ctrl-f...

  • Pleb (unregistered)

    Re: the 'disabled ink' one, I can't help thinking he was just getting his terminology wrong and he was just concerned that people would be able to visit his company's website. Maybe it wasn't ready yet or something.

    It's like how paper or TV advertising used to say "log on to www..." or "click on www..." because they weren't sure of the best way to put it (most of them say "visit" now I think).

    So maybe he was saying 'click on' as a shortcut phrase because he didn't know the proper terminology for visiting a website.

    It just sounds so unlikely someone wouldn't be able to grasp that you can't click on paper.

  • DavidK (unregistered)

    I had a job creating printable web forms eleven years ago for a summer at Disney. Corporate purchasing was moving away from JetForms and they needed an interim stopgap. All forms were HTML web pages, carefully spaced to fit on a printed 8.5" X 11" sheet of paper.

    I wrote a script in Usertalk (the scripting language that came with Userland Frontier, a Mac scripting app that became Manila CMS and Radio, one of the first blog publishing tools) to ingest a jetform datafile, then output HTML forms. I had a javascript library that did in-page validation and error checking, and my translation script would even detect what validators the JetForms fields used, then applied the equivalent one I had written in Javascript. Usertalk because I knew it from my Mac days, and I could also run it on Windows. I didn't know Perl so well yet.

    The forms were never intended to be submitted via http; just printed out and placed in some accountant's inbox. Best paid internship ever, though. $15/hr, free park tickets and lots of disney schwag.

  • bigbird (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    bigbird:
    You're all - impossible is an absolute - one thing can't be more impossible/impossibler/possimpible than another
    In human language, we have things called "idioms" and "figures of speech" and "jokes" that are not literally accurate but are intended to convey an impression.

    Indeed we do. But you seem to seem struggle with the "jokes" and people having their tongues in their cheeks... or have I just missed the same in your comment?!

  • Jay C (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    Anon:
    What's so odd about someone printing out and mailing a form? I've had customers who, to reply to an email, print out the email, write their reply on the email, scan the reply, and then send it back to us as an attachment.
    I've had a customer who, when asked for a list of changes to make to a website's layout:
    • used printscreen to get captures
    • printed those snapshots
    • highlighted the areas and penciled the changes to make
    • scanned the result
    • sent that to me via email

    That day we laughed a lot. Before the crying started, that is.

    And your point is? If you know there will lot of changes, or you just need to brainstorm, there's nothing like a printout and a pen or highlighter. It only sucks when they choose to scan it in B&W and choose two colors with similar luminosity, or they just don't know how to get good results from their scanner (although, that's often the case). I don't know about you, but if all I could have installed on my computer for an imaging program was ms-paint, I'd take the above steps as well.

  • Jay C (unregistered) in reply to Ouch!
    Ouch!:
    Adriano:
    amischiefr:
    So what? So they don't have FireFox with Snapshot, so they didn't want to do a Ctrl + Alt + Print Scrn and paste it into Paint. So you made fun of a non tech person who gave you the desired changed, but it wasn't in the form you wanted? Pathetic. I hope they are reading this and decide not to do work with you anymore.

    To you, and all the other smartasses, first: thanks for wishing me out of my job. It hasn't worked so far, and I doubt it will in the future. But it might be nice to spew bile on the web to random strangers, I'd have to try that sometime.

    Second: The non-tech person you talk about could have stopped at printing the pages, then penciling the changes, then sending them to me via snail mail, so the actual changes they wanted were readable (that they were unreadable in the final digital copy was something the same client apologized for). The 'let's scan this back, acknowledge it's useless, and email it back' was the sad-funny part. At least for me.

    So you should have included that in your summary. Also, you wouldn't have made such a bad impression then.

    I'm sorry if I didn't make clear that the penciled changes scanned back in were in black and white and utterly unreadable, so that I had to call the client and ask what they wanted. I'll try to improve on that next time.
    Very good.

    Yes, I'll agree that is funny/sad, and actually, it's happened to me as well. But without mentioning the atroscity of the final copy -- that's like leaving out the punchline of a good joke. :-/

  • Flaming Foobar (unregistered) in reply to Adriano
    Adriano:
    I've had a customer who, when asked for a list of changes to make to a website's layout:
    • used printscreen to get captures
    • printed those snapshots
    • highlighted the areas and penciled the changes to make
    • scanned the result
    • sent that to me via email

    Seems pretty efficient to me. Can't think of a better way, tbh.

  • not a us citizen (phew!) (unregistered)

    This:-

    http://foia.fbi.gov/foia_request.htm

    is most certainly a classic 0.1 Web form - badly scanned jpeg - with clicky buttons, but no actual form. The web from a well funded government agency.

  • Colton W. English (unregistered) in reply to The guy
    The guy:
    If you go to the site for the first picture, the form actually has some hidden input values. It must have been possible to submit the form in the past, but then it broke and they didn't know how to fix it. But then again, there is no <FORM ...> tag, so who really knows... Definite WTF...

    www.central-uk.com/central-uk/form.htm

    Wow.. really no-one else gets it?? <form target="mailto:[email protected]"> really old form submit type that I have only seen work in text books.

  • dave (unregistered) in reply to Flaming Foobar

    Couldn't they have just printed the webpage instead of taking then printing screen captures?

  • blaster999 (unregistered)

    I had a more interesting occasion. A client sent an email with an empty body and a TIFF file attached. This file was a strange kind of TIFF, which no program on my Kubuntu machine would open. Moreover, Image & Fax viewer on XP (in VirtualBox) would also refuse to read it. Took some time and effort to find a suitable app, and finally it opened. So what did I see? A scanned piece of paper with a website address handwritten on it! Part of me wanted to go ROFL, and part of me wanted to kill the sender the most violent way possible. People who do such things must not procreate. Period.

  • http://www.pretty-tiffany.com (unregistered)

    Welcome to wholesale-Replica-Mall. com ! Our wholesale website is very nice imitation technology and after-sale service with our product.

  • http://www.happytiffany.com (unregistered)

    It's made of 925 sterling silver. Itâ??s best near the original edition model. With polished 100% sterling silver 925 stamped and Tiffany & Co engraved

  • Simon T (unregistered)

    I am based in the UK and recently ordered an item for my motorbike from a retailer with very limited web facilities. In fact it looked the sale of the item across retailers was supported by the same system as more than one retailer of the item had exactly the same interface.

    When ordering the item, the form asked for credit card info. Check URL - no HTTPS. Checked the source to see if it was an IFRAME with HTTPS - no. In fact it was posting to a formmail perl script, with the submit button sending form.submit(). Before this, however it had alert('All data is secured with 128 bit encryption').

    Sure enough, I filled out the form (minus the card details, of course) and I received the email back with all my details, including the card section ("Credit card number: I will call you with the card details").

    I spoke to the retailer about this - he was adamant it was secure because he had been assured it was.

  • My Name (unregistered)

    " CSS serves to define as "font-style:italic" "

    As a joke, I once set the global CSS on a large wiki to set all to italic and all to bold. Rather than fix this (it was fairly obvious what I had done from the recent changes page), people began to update all of the pages to compensate.
  • My Name (unregistered)

    " CSS serves to define as "font-style:italic" "

    As a joke, I once set the global CSS on a large wiki to set all to italic and all to bold. Rather than fix this (it was fairly obvious what I had done from the recent changes page), people began to update all of the pages to compensate.
  • eric bloedow (unregistered)

    that last part reminded me of an idiot who thought that printing an animated GIF would make it DANCE ON THE PAGE, and complained when it didn't!

Leave a comment on “Web 0.1 Forms”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article