(account deleted) 27 Nov 2018 13:39
I loathe 866 for inspiring what will no doubt become a wave of shit like this.
Forum
» Hidden / Per page discussions
» RPC-6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
This is the discussion related to the wiki page RPC-6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666.
(account deleted) 27 Nov 2018 13:39
don't worry they'll just be called copies
besides, if they're actually good then why hate them
(although the background on this one is a little too far imo)
Usually, I wouldn't agree with critique from Moen, but this just hurt my eyes the longer I tried to read it. And they were especially in pain when I re-read it to try and figure out if the anomalies made sense, at all. I came to the conclusion that they didn't, and while I don't like the concept or the format break, it's decent enough to get a 2.
Ahhh, ahhh, no! This isn't right! It's so difficult to read! This article would've been waaaaay better if it didn't have all the unnecessary fourth wall breaking. Just having the first and second iterations would've been fine! Why must you do this?!
blabbo
The difference between something like this and something like RPC-866 is simple. RPC-866 may be a fucky format-screw. But I can read it. I just tilt my head, and I could finish it.
I gave up on this after the first paragraph of the description. I have a genuine belief that someone is going to have a seizure from this clusterfuck. The red text you used did not make it easier to distinguish from the background, because the background is so noisy that it still manages to completely destroy the reading experience.
I don't care if a good narrative would have been found in here, I refuse to finish this out of respect for my eyes. They do not deserve the punishment that this TV-static would have inflicted on them.
1 star.
EDIT: Well it seems like either they've turned off the garbage TV-static, or the new site layout has fucked the code. Either way, I'm actually going to finish reading this now.
OK, so upon actually finishing it. It doesn't feel too interesting, I like the visual image of shit tonnes of fucking rats underneath the ground, but the rat monster thing that attacks by sending more rats to eat a fucker alive was kinda unintersting. I personally feel like if a sinkhole had opened up or something beneath the guy's feet, it would have been a bit less "generic spoop crap".
In the event that this is the permanent new layout of the page, I'd change my rating to 3 stars, a 2.5 if I could give it that. But if it turns out this is just a bug, and the page will return back to that utterly garbage TV-static, my rating will stay at a 1.
EDIT 2: OK. So now all of the fuckery is gone. It no longer looks like the screening has been overloaded. The only even mildly error looking thing is a bunch of 6s. Granted, I can read it. But I preferred the version that had a little bit of CSS fuckery to this.
My rating has been changed to 2 stars though, since at this point I'm confident you'll not return to the garbage that was version 1.
(V) (;,,;) (V)
An example of CSS thats actually usable instead of absolutely impossible to read without tilting your monitor, disabling CSS, and enabling autoscrolling. But lets try to stop GIFs from ever making it onto articles.
+5
/forum/t-8569856/rpc-66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666#post-