Thursday, 22nd of November, 2007
06:47: A simple guide to status modes in IM clients
In some ways, this is a reiteration of what Anam posted a while ago on the same subject. I decided to write it anyway, though, partially out of frustration and partially because it seems that the use of status modes isn't as apparent as I'd thought it was.
Every time I set myself as N/A or DND in my internet messaging client, these days, people seem to decide that they absolutely need to talk to me at that particular moment. Somehow, every month, it gets a little worse, and I'm getting rather tired of ignoring and instructing people, so here's a quick list of status modes as used in ICQ. (ICQ is the original and most comprehensible IM system in that aspect - don't whine about this not being tailored to MSN. MSN copied the ICQ layout and then changed the features around.)
What it means:
Present. Here. Available. Likely to answer if approached.
What to use it for:
Online status is used to signal that you are at the computer and willing to talk.
How to interpret it:
Usually, people will use online as above. Some people seem to find it pertinent to leave their client in Online mode whenever their IM client is running, thus completely voiding the use of status modes. They're easy to spot, however, and it only takes a couple of braincells to figure out that they probably won't always answer.
What it means:
Computer off. Not online at all. No chance of answer, whatsoever.
What to use it for:
When your IM client is off.
How to interpret it:
The user is offline or has put you on their invisible-to list. Either way, they're not going to respond immediately, but you can send a message that they will eventually receive.
What it means:
User is nearby or at the computer, but busy with something and probably not interested in idle chatter unless they're already speaking to you.
What to use it for:
See above.
How to interpret it:
Try to keep from sending idle chatter. Don't expect the user to answer right away.
What it means:
Do Not Disturb. Bugger off. Come back later. User is at the computer or nearby, but does not desire to be disturbed.
What to use it for:
When you need people to back off so that you can focus on what you're doing, or when you need some peace. Don't use it as a sort-of-away. Use Occupied if you're busy but might be willing to talk. DND is only useful if it really means Do Not Disturb.
How to interpret it:
Don't send messages unless it's important. Show respect to your acquaintance and leave them the fuck alone.
What it means:
Temporarily not here. Gone away to do something, but likely to return within reasonable time.
What to use it for:
When you've left the computer but intend to return fairly soon.
How to interpret it:
The user isn't here, but they will be in a bit. Leave a message if you've got something to say, kind of like when you get the voice-mail on a mobile phone.
What it means:
Not available. Not here. Will not answer and will probably be gone for a while.
What to use it for:
When you're not around, but your IM client is on.
How to interpret it:
The user isn't here, and won't be back for a while. This is like the voice-mail function on a home phone number.
I have a lot of people on my contact list. I can't keep explaining the basics of IM courtesy and practice to everyone. Please do not send me messages querying me if I'm around. If I am interested in talking, my status message will denote it. If you want to relay a message, do so. Just send send the bloody message. I will look at it when I have the time and energy. It's not complicated.
Being shown some basic respect in communication and privacy is important to everyone - to someone with anxiety and mood problems such as mine, even more so, since my DND message may well mean that I'm dealing with an anxiety attack and will react vehemently to being rubbed the wrong way. You may think that I'm being a bastard, but the fact is that I've done the equivalent of putting a comprehensive Do Not Disturb sign on my door and you knocked it anyway.
To clarify, I'm not complaining about getting messages when I'm in N/A mode or such (even though I would prefer not getting boingboing links and the likes when I'm in DND.) I'm pointing out that there is a reason for these modes and that it would be nice if more people took them into account. I know I'm not alone in this. Besides Anam, I have a couple of other friends who have taken to shutting down their clients entirely whenever they're not explicitly interested in talking. To get some basic privacy and peace when they're at the computer, they've had to cut off that line of communication entirely. It's ridiculous, but completely understandable.
Noone is perfect. We all have those energised highs when we find a link that everyone just has to see, and realise a little too late that maybe everyone was not in the mood for it. This isn't about making mistakes. It's about showing basic courtesy on a general level. It's about trying not to be an arse all the time.
Every time I set myself as N/A or DND in my internet messaging client, these days, people seem to decide that they absolutely need to talk to me at that particular moment. Somehow, every month, it gets a little worse, and I'm getting rather tired of ignoring and instructing people, so here's a quick list of status modes as used in ICQ. (ICQ is the original and most comprehensible IM system in that aspect - don't whine about this not being tailored to MSN. MSN copied the ICQ layout and then changed the features around.)
Online
What it means:
Present. Here. Available. Likely to answer if approached.
What to use it for:
Online status is used to signal that you are at the computer and willing to talk.
How to interpret it:
Usually, people will use online as above. Some people seem to find it pertinent to leave their client in Online mode whenever their IM client is running, thus completely voiding the use of status modes. They're easy to spot, however, and it only takes a couple of braincells to figure out that they probably won't always answer.
Offline
What it means:
Computer off. Not online at all. No chance of answer, whatsoever.
What to use it for:
When your IM client is off.
How to interpret it:
The user is offline or has put you on their invisible-to list. Either way, they're not going to respond immediately, but you can send a message that they will eventually receive.
Occupied
What it means:
User is nearby or at the computer, but busy with something and probably not interested in idle chatter unless they're already speaking to you.
What to use it for:
See above.
How to interpret it:
Try to keep from sending idle chatter. Don't expect the user to answer right away.
DND (Do Not Disturb)
What it means:
Do Not Disturb. Bugger off. Come back later. User is at the computer or nearby, but does not desire to be disturbed.
What to use it for:
When you need people to back off so that you can focus on what you're doing, or when you need some peace. Don't use it as a sort-of-away. Use Occupied if you're busy but might be willing to talk. DND is only useful if it really means Do Not Disturb.
How to interpret it:
Don't send messages unless it's important. Show respect to your acquaintance and leave them the fuck alone.
Away
What it means:
Temporarily not here. Gone away to do something, but likely to return within reasonable time.
What to use it for:
When you've left the computer but intend to return fairly soon.
How to interpret it:
The user isn't here, but they will be in a bit. Leave a message if you've got something to say, kind of like when you get the voice-mail on a mobile phone.
N/A (Not Available, also Extended Away)
What it means:
Not available. Not here. Will not answer and will probably be gone for a while.
What to use it for:
When you're not around, but your IM client is on.
How to interpret it:
The user isn't here, and won't be back for a while. This is like the voice-mail function on a home phone number.
I have a lot of people on my contact list. I can't keep explaining the basics of IM courtesy and practice to everyone. Please do not send me messages querying me if I'm around. If I am interested in talking, my status message will denote it. If you want to relay a message, do so. Just send send the bloody message. I will look at it when I have the time and energy. It's not complicated.
Being shown some basic respect in communication and privacy is important to everyone - to someone with anxiety and mood problems such as mine, even more so, since my DND message may well mean that I'm dealing with an anxiety attack and will react vehemently to being rubbed the wrong way. You may think that I'm being a bastard, but the fact is that I've done the equivalent of putting a comprehensive Do Not Disturb sign on my door and you knocked it anyway.
To clarify, I'm not complaining about getting messages when I'm in N/A mode or such (even though I would prefer not getting boingboing links and the likes when I'm in DND.) I'm pointing out that there is a reason for these modes and that it would be nice if more people took them into account. I know I'm not alone in this. Besides Anam, I have a couple of other friends who have taken to shutting down their clients entirely whenever they're not explicitly interested in talking. To get some basic privacy and peace when they're at the computer, they've had to cut off that line of communication entirely. It's ridiculous, but completely understandable.
Noone is perfect. We all have those energised highs when we find a link that everyone just has to see, and realise a little too late that maybe everyone was not in the mood for it. This isn't about making mistakes. It's about showing basic courtesy on a general level. It's about trying not to be an arse all the time.
Sunday, 14th of October, 2007
00:03: Ye Fine Olde Arte of Presentuary Packery
For Spid's birthday, we decided he needed a new iPod, because his old one was more or less literally falling apart. A geographically diverse bunch of us conspired to buy him a present-generation version of this miracle of enginerereering. It fell to yours truly to wrap the gift, and I was asked to document the process for those who couldn't attend the celebration.
This is my story. [cue dramatic music]
The iPod, of course, came packaged in its neat, compact box. Very slick. Very Apple. The rabid branding gnomes had marked it on all sides save the bottom. Cheeky little bastards. We'll show them!
Beside the fancy, bit-generation walkman, the package was to include some lovely, dark chocolate bars.
Gift wrapping is usually boring, and I have a tendency to go out of my way to do something more than just clothe the present in dreary, waxed paper. The packaging should mislead and build up for the best surprise effect. For this occasion, I got a compact disc storage box at a local store. It was a bit more expensive than I'd planned, but Art requires Sacrifice! Besides, it's definitely Poh-licketilly Correct to use wrapping that's actually a gift in itself! Less Waste, More Love! Shave the Earth! Share and Enjoy! Er...
Of course, the iPod box fit rather awkwardly into the CD storage box, but that was part of the idea. Yes! I am such a geniously wittish creature! I should rule the world, really. Worship me!
.png)
Cat. Not included.
Now, for the packing material!
Now we're making progress. Note the surreptitious placement of the card. We don't want to give the message away at first glance!
The card. (No, I don't speak German. It's a silly language. Yer.)
.png)
Cat, unimpressed. Still not included.
Chocolate-covered iPod! Yum!
(The order of the chocolate stack was actually important, because some of the bars would be recognised as coming from the U.S. - giving away part of the surprise. Since I knew he was going to be tired at the celebration, I was hoping he'd be less alerted if I mixed in some obviously local-bought varieties.)
Shut the lid, add ribbon and voilá! Yer sneakarly wrappaged iPod and chocolates present-gift-offering, deluxe - hold the feline. Please!
.png)
Oh, come on!
addendum: I managed to forget Inz on the card. Sorry, man. I've told Spid about it, so he knows you were in on the present. Typical of my lousy memory and tired mind.
This is my story. [cue dramatic music]
The iPod, of course, came packaged in its neat, compact box. Very slick. Very Apple. The rabid branding gnomes had marked it on all sides save the bottom. Cheeky little bastards. We'll show them!
Beside the fancy, bit-generation walkman, the package was to include some lovely, dark chocolate bars.
Gift wrapping is usually boring, and I have a tendency to go out of my way to do something more than just clothe the present in dreary, waxed paper. The packaging should mislead and build up for the best surprise effect. For this occasion, I got a compact disc storage box at a local store. It was a bit more expensive than I'd planned, but Art requires Sacrifice! Besides, it's definitely Poh-licketilly Correct to use wrapping that's actually a gift in itself! Less Waste, More Love! Shave the Earth! Share and Enjoy! Er...
Of course, the iPod box fit rather awkwardly into the CD storage box, but that was part of the idea. Yes! I am such a geniously wittish creature! I should rule the world, really. Worship me!
Cat. Not included.
Now, for the packing material!
Now we're making progress. Note the surreptitious placement of the card. We don't want to give the message away at first glance!
The card. (No, I don't speak German. It's a silly language. Yer.)
Cat, unimpressed. Still not included.
Chocolate-covered iPod! Yum!
(The order of the chocolate stack was actually important, because some of the bars would be recognised as coming from the U.S. - giving away part of the surprise. Since I knew he was going to be tired at the celebration, I was hoping he'd be less alerted if I mixed in some obviously local-bought varieties.)
Shut the lid, add ribbon and voilá! Yer sneakarly wrappaged iPod and chocolates present-gift-offering, deluxe - hold the feline. Please!
Oh, come on!
addendum: I managed to forget Inz on the card. Sorry, man. I've told Spid about it, so he knows you were in on the present. Typical of my lousy memory and tired mind.
Thursday, 27th of September, 2007
17:38: Shooting from a distance...
Whatever happened to the overhead view, third-person tactical shooter? You know, the likes of Syndicate, Cannon Fodder and Crusader: No Remorse?
You'd think with the immense success of Diablo, its sequel and the endless stream of derivatives, someone would come up with the idea of making one that involved gunplay rather than melee.
Apparently, not so. The closest thing to a recent successor of the original tactical shooter games that I can think of is the Grand Theft Auto 3 titles, which at least partially involve the same type of game-play, and the highly underrated Silent Storm, which really is more of the turn-based, Jagged Alliance/X-Com type of beast.
Now, I know there are supposedly third-person tactical shooters around, but they're all run from a highly impractical over-the-shoulder view which is, if we're going to be straight, pretty bloody close to first person. They also tend to play out very much like first-person shooters in terms of handling and inventory, where the older variety had at least as much in common with role-playing games.
I also know that there is some disdain for us "old-timers" yearning for a return of overhead (which is not necessarily isometric) view in something other than the occasional Baldur's Gate (or *cough* actually, Ultima VI/VII *cough*) derivative or strategy games, but wouldn't it be nice to have something other than the clone-upon-clone action titles we're getting, these days? Just for a change, wouldn't it be pretty fun to play a shooter game with the handling and visual style of, say Neverwinter Nights? No? Well, there will certainly be more formula FPS games for you. It would be nice if the immense, global game market could offer up some variety for the rest of us.
The third-person tactical shooter was an idea sprung from combining the role-playing game view and handling with shooter-style gameplay, and it worked splendidly; several major hit titles proved it beyond argument. In the flood that followed the rise of the first-person shooter, however, this wonderful game concept was somehow utterly forgotten, and apparently no game publisher today will touch a game concept that hasn't been iterated at least five times in the latest three years.
Funny how it seems that the supposed worship of "revolutionising gameplay" and "next-gen" amounts to spurning everything but the most obvious of concepts and how it would actually renew the business a great deal more to look a bit backward rather than forward, now and then.
You'd think with the immense success of Diablo, its sequel and the endless stream of derivatives, someone would come up with the idea of making one that involved gunplay rather than melee.
Apparently, not so. The closest thing to a recent successor of the original tactical shooter games that I can think of is the Grand Theft Auto 3 titles, which at least partially involve the same type of game-play, and the highly underrated Silent Storm, which really is more of the turn-based, Jagged Alliance/X-Com type of beast.
Now, I know there are supposedly third-person tactical shooters around, but they're all run from a highly impractical over-the-shoulder view which is, if we're going to be straight, pretty bloody close to first person. They also tend to play out very much like first-person shooters in terms of handling and inventory, where the older variety had at least as much in common with role-playing games.
I also know that there is some disdain for us "old-timers" yearning for a return of overhead (which is not necessarily isometric) view in something other than the occasional Baldur's Gate (or *cough* actually, Ultima VI/VII *cough*) derivative or strategy games, but wouldn't it be nice to have something other than the clone-upon-clone action titles we're getting, these days? Just for a change, wouldn't it be pretty fun to play a shooter game with the handling and visual style of, say Neverwinter Nights? No? Well, there will certainly be more formula FPS games for you. It would be nice if the immense, global game market could offer up some variety for the rest of us.
The third-person tactical shooter was an idea sprung from combining the role-playing game view and handling with shooter-style gameplay, and it worked splendidly; several major hit titles proved it beyond argument. In the flood that followed the rise of the first-person shooter, however, this wonderful game concept was somehow utterly forgotten, and apparently no game publisher today will touch a game concept that hasn't been iterated at least five times in the latest three years.
Funny how it seems that the supposed worship of "revolutionising gameplay" and "next-gen" amounts to spurning everything but the most obvious of concepts and how it would actually renew the business a great deal more to look a bit backward rather than forward, now and then.