This is our first try with the new "Chat Room" module. Jump in, try it out, and report any bugs or other problems.
Is it just me or does this chat room feel like a tread that we can reply to?
You there Paul? I see ya somewhere.
"Carburetors man!! That's what life is all about."
Musicians Collaboration Studio
have we given up on the bass chat idea or has time and life intervened ? if this interface is not working i might suggest iif you wanted to try and find a java IRC script that would connect to and IRC server i could setup a sever here and have it connect to a private server just for us.......just a thought
*and it harm none,do what thou will*
*and it harm none,do what thou will*
IRC isn't a bad idea. I think there's a Drupal plugin that allows connecting to IRC.
Since this bug in Chat Room isn't going away, and since the maintainers of that application seem to have no interest in fixing, and since no one else I know has time/skill to fix it, I'm calling this a failed beta.
There were two other Drupal chat applications that looked worth trying. I'll find that IRC-powered one. And I'll also try one called Buddy Chat that I've heard about.
i am still interested in a live chat and willing to setup an irc server to host one if that is what was needed....
We really need a solution, but I think we really need one that integrates with the user accounts at BP. There might be a module that allows that. And, if so, I'd certainly be willing to consider IRC and would appreciate your help with it. I really need to upgrade to the latest version of Drupal, as I hope the chat options have improved (and, besides, we are on too old a version).
There are very few web applications out there that have an easy upgrade process. WordPress is the only one I know of. Upgrading BP is a tedious, time-intensive process, which is why I've let it fall behind. But I just have to do it.
Manually approving user accounts is killing me, too. And I often let those fall behind, which isn't good either. I just approved several and will have another email about that.
the setup over at guitarchaos.com as it has a really great chat that even allows members to jam with each other (even tho i think the jamming part may be for the premium members.
That would be dreamy. I'll have to check that out. I have bookmarked somewhere an open source project that allows jamming in realtime across the web. Anyone want to help me test that out? We'd have to find a day and time, of course. I don't think it handles video, just audio and maybe text chat (though we could use some other chat app if it doesn't handle that).
I want to know more about harmonics. Is this a certain technique or is it a certain style? Let me know anything that you might know on the subject.
Harmonics in this context are places on the string where, by lightly touching the string without fretting, you get a pure tone that is an integer multiple of the fundamental string frequency. For example if you lightly touch the A string at the 12 fret and pluck the string you get a pure tone of 880Hz. That is twice the frequency of the fundamental A=440Hz.
Here is an excellent wiki article on harmonics.
As far as using harmonics in a bass line, well there isn't all that much call to do so except perhaps in solo work. Harmonics are pure tones and rather 'other-worldly' in sound.
Another more common use of harmonics are in tuning your bass. You can get a more accurate absolute tuning from the 12fret harmonics and a more accurate relative tuning from 5th and 7th harmonics.
Hope this helps a bit.
I guess this does help a bit. I guess the question originated from looking at somes tabs from Victor Wooten and in the keys they called for harmonics and I didn't relly understand what they were calling for. So in the context of tabs would you pluck the string or just tap the string on the fret board? I appreciate the response.
To play harmonics you lightly touch the string at the location of the harmonic. You don't press it down onto the fret, just touch it. Then you pluck the string. It will give a thin, pure sound not a meaty, normal sound.
Sometimes you need to search a bit for the exact spot to touch the string. It tends to be a little ahead (toward the pickups) of the fret so a 12th fret harmonic tends to be a tiny bit ahead of the actual 12th fret. Give it a go and see if you can get it. Don't hesitate to come back with more questions if you want.
Thanks for the info. I will give this a try. I will be sure to ask any other questions as they arise, as I am sure they will.
Not sure if dorko meant to put this in the chat forum but it seems more of a technique/theory question. Not a prob but thought I would move it . . . BUTT . . .
ANYWAYS, I went to move it and I no longer have that option under admin, whats up with dat dude? hehe Oh I did switch to Bluemarine if that makes a diff.
"WHAT ARE UUUUU DUUUUUING IN MAA SWAAAMP!!
Musicians Collaboration Studio
You have that permission, Hazz. The trouble is, it only works with posts, not with individual comments. I can't move it either. Drupal doesn't let you split the comments mid-stream and make that a new post in a different forum.
Let's start a new thread in the technique forum called "using harmonics" and take it from there. We can inlude links to the original question and the followups.
knocks out the idea of lengthy posts killing the chats...testchat005 dies at 6 posts...
Just wondering but did you see this Wheat?
* There is a bug in Drupal versions 4.7.6 and below and 5.1 and below which prevents chats from working properly.
* Chat Room requires MySQL 4.1 or higher.
* The Drupal 4.7 branch of Chat Room will not work if it is installed outside the Drupal directory and accessed by a symlink."
#2 also does not apply. We're running MySQL 5.0.24
I found an additional issue with a line of code in chatroom.module. But I dove in and ours checks out (it was an issue with an older version of Chat Room).
This is a fairly serious bug, though. And I haven't had any response at all from the application maintainers. Maybe the version for Drupal 5.0 is unaffected. We'll have to upgrade to 5.0 sooner or later, as Drupal generally only maintains the current version (right now, 6.0), and the previous one (5.0). That they're still maintaining 4.7.x is a bit surprising, but probably due to the fact that 6.0 came out only about a year after 5.0.
Since we just upgraded to 4.7 in December, I'm not looking forward to another upgrade, of course. :) But it went pretty smoothly last time and Drupal has focussed a lot of effort on making upgrades less painful. I've learned some lessons on that score, too. And our next upgrade should go even easier than our previous one did (but I'm not putting a date on it at this point). Maintaining this site could easily turn into a part-time job. If it only payed as well as a part-time job, I'd be happy to quit my other one and do this instead. :)
I did see that, just yesterday, Hazz. But we're running 4.7.10. So known issue #1 doesn't apply. #3 doesn't apply either, as the modules is installed in the modules directory. I'll check on the MySQL version.
I now my mind can be blank from time to time but I am seeing blank pages in chat again. COuld it have anything to do with the Guest I see showing up during the mornings?
The 003 version does not seem to be working. I saw Pauls name but a blank page in the chat window (maybe that was Paul's mind heheh) anyways, he vanished again but still a blank page was left behind.
Yeah, that's the issue: this weird blank page business. I haven't tested it with any them other than Amadou. It could be theme-related. Or it could be in the Chat Room code itself. I'm going archive 003 and start an 004. Maybe we can find the particular type of post that makes it happen. It has gone blank on be on long posts twice. But I don't know if it dying is a function of length or some character or what.
I've filed a bug but haven't seen any response to it yet (link is up-thread). They're mostly working on the version that works with Drupal 5. So I fear they won't be quick to fix a 4.7 bug (especially now that Drupal 6 is out). But, if I can figure out the exact cause, I might dive into the code and fix it myself, or call in a favor from one of my coder friends.
The chat page isn't working for me this morning either. It reports a java error on the page.
Ok, this is really weird. The quote option was available when I logged on and started reading posts. As soon as I replied to you the quote option vanished. It seemed to disappear when I hit the back button in my browser.
The chat was working for me yesterday from work. When I tried it from home last night I got the blank page. Weird, just plain weird.
Is this a non-smoking chat room?.....LOL!
Smoke 'em if you got 'em, Dave. :)
WOOO HOOO! But I feel it's only fair to warn all of you:
WARNING: THE SUREON GENERAL HAS DETERMINED THAT SECOND HAND CYBER SMOKE IS DANGEROUS TO YOUR HEALTH. THIS STUDY IS BASED ON YEARS OF DECIET, ALTERATION OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF, EXAGERATION, AND MINIPULATION OF THE FACTS. THERE IS NO SAFE LEVEL OF CYBER SMOKE!
Keep believing what the cigarette manufacturers, their lobbyists, and their hired-gun scientists want you to believe, Dave. It took them until about 2005 to admit that cigarettes aren't good for you. It'll take 'em until 3010 to admit that second-hand smoke is dangerous.
Credible scientist who once were pro banned have turned against the movement Wheat. It has nothing to do with the sleazy cigarettes companies. Scientist are losing credibility and so is the Government. They can't even prove that casual smoking does any harm. How the Hell can they prove ANYTHING about second hand smoke. You'd have to sit in a smokey bar for 250 hours to take in the equivilent of ONE ciggarette. You don't think the Government has hired gun scientist? I think common sense told us a long time ago smoking is dangerous to the smoker. But, the way they make it sound I should have been dead after that first pack of smokes, IF indeed I lasted that long. Why are they pushing for bans outside? It has nothing to do with second hand smoke. It's been proven in New York city that a bar with proper filtration tested cleaner than the air outside on the street. Look, I would have no problem with a smoking ban if it was based on TRUE facts. Yeah, sure there's propaganda on both sides. But, why is it that everytime someone speaks out against the smoking bans, the fabrication of facts, the exageration of studies, that they are in the pocket of the cigarette companies? Some DO have the ability to read the facts and decide for themselves.
I think some day we will be a smoke free society. But, this is not the way to achieve it! Both smokers AND non-smokers should be outraged at this incredible unjusified abuse of power! First the Government rapes the Constitution of this great land with The Patriot Act and now this. What the Hell is going to be next?
So, I take it you didn't like my website....LOL!
Honestly, I haven't had time to give your website a good look. But the dangers of smoking have been as well established as science can establish them (science, properly understood, never proves anything beyond doubt. Absolute proof is the domain of dogma, not science). I already agreed with you that filtration sounds reasonable and that, if it can be scientifically shown to work, would be preferable to an outright ban. Banning smoking outside is just silly, and there's plenty of hysteria on both sides.
But (and you knew there was a "but," right), second-hand/side stream smoke is a health risk. And it's a more dangerous risk than you think. I don't have time to crawl the research databases to which I have access to cite chapter and verse to you at the moment, but I certainly can and I probably will. Oh, what the hell: here's an abstract (free registration required to read the full text). And the Wikipedia article on passive smoking is worth a look. One study (Barnes and Barro, 1998) of review articles on the subject found that "In multiple logistic regression analyses controlling for article quality, peer review status, article topic, and year of publication, the only factor associated with concluding that passive smoking is not harmful was whether an author was affiliated with the tobacco industry." I can do better, but there are only so many hours in the day.
I don't think you give a damn about the cigarette companies. But I think you're basing a lot of your argument on the "science" provided by the charlatans on their bank roll. They've spread misinformation about this subject for years, for the express purpose that reasonable people like yourself will mistake their sponsored rubber-stamp research as the real deal.
The federal government has been in love with big tobacco since time out of mind. That's big tax revenue for them. They don't want to see tobacco go away. If they did, it would have gone away by now. There are too many people with a vested interest in tobacco for it to ever go away. And, I'm glad, actually, as prohibition just leads to black markets. I'd prefer tobacco to be available, and regulated (and taxed), than illegal and unregulated (and untaxed).
You don't need junk science to make your point. Your point is based on individual liberty and rational response to risk. You don't need to downplay the (I believe, well established) dangers of second-hand and sides-stream smoke to prove that banning smoking in public is a bad strategy. For that, all you need are stats that show filtration systems can take the risk down to a reasonable level coupled with an argument that adults have a right to engage in risky behavior if it suits them. That's an argument I'd support 100%.
We can quip back and forth, if you like, but the real place for this sort of off-topic discussion is the the Pub. I suggest we take it there and not much up every thread with it. Fair enough?
Show down at the "SMOE-KAY CORRALL" it is....LOL!
Wheat you do realize that second hand cyber smoke is a mythical substance invented in the dark corners of my mind don't you?......hehehehe!
Hi Wheat. I have to point out there's a subtle difference between what you and Dave are saying here. You are asking, and answering, the question 'is side-stream smoke a health risk'. Dave is asking 'is side-stream smoke more harmful than other common sources of air pollution'.
The answer to the first is an unequivocal YES. Side-stream smoke is a health hazard. You have provided some articles that support that and there are many more out there; good science not junk science.
However, the answer to the second question is not so clear. You'd need to find quality, unbiased, scientific articles that review the threshold limit values of various sources of air pollution with side-stream smoke. This is what Dave is arguing in my opinion. He's saying that the danger, while present, is greatly over estimated in general and on this point I agree with him.
Just recently there was an scientific article that made the local news showing indoor fireplaces subject the user to a greater threat of adverse health effects than does average exposure to side-stream smoke. Needless to say many lay persons were offended that anyone would suggest warming up by the fire was harmful.
You are quite correct in your attitude, though, when you say you support good science and engineering over hysteria. Good for you, I wish more people would too.
Point taken Paul (and, by extension, Dave). I am not one of those who thinks it is necessary, possible, or desirable to legislate all risk out of daily life. I commute to work each day by car. That fact alone subjects me to far more risk, I would hazard, than side-stream smoke ever will. For that matter, it probably subjects me to more risk than smoking an occasional cigarette would. It would take numbers to prove, of course, these are just my hunches.
I'd have to do some research into risk levels of these various activities to see how much they matter to me. I tend to avoid smoke if I can reasonably avoid it (just as I would avoid any, for me, needlessly risky behavior if I could reasonably avoid it). But I would not let a smoky bar stand in the way of me and a beer (another high-risk behavior), if I were thirsty for one, or a band I wanted to see, etc.
Thanks for your comment. I think you're right and that Dave and I agree more than we disagree on this issue. I'd have to do some more research before I could continue the argument in any really profitable direction.
"I think you're right and that Dave and I agree more than we disagree on this issue."
Does this mean you will now start drinking mini kegs?
Start? I already do whenever possible. hahahaha
BTW, where's the quote option gone for replies? Or is my PC doing weird things?
Nope, the quote option seems to be missing. I was replying to Wheat anyways there Paul. I knew you had already tapped the mini. haha
That's why discussion on this site is civil whereas many other sites are not. With a little thought it's easy to see how we generally agree on more than we disagree on. And when we actually do disagree we can always go back to discussing fingers vs pick. ;^}
Yes, smoke 'em if ya got 'em but if your smoke comes my way then expect a chaw of tabbaccy to be sent yer way. hahahaha, makes a good stain on light colored shoes and shirts. j/k I do not chew anymore but that is what I have done in the past.
I thought about chewing to get the nicotine I needed to stop smoking. Kind of use it like the gum. A guy I work with likes Skoal Cherry and he uses more than a can a day. If you read the can... it's like he's smoking 3 to 4 pack of cigs.
I just have to wait for a time period when I won't have much stress and try cold turkey again. I have used every product on the market including prescription stuff without success.... even did hypnosis.
I'm really not proud that my son, who will be 17 soon, knows that I smoke. I don't want him to think its a good idea.
hmmm... time to step outside: PUFF
Yeah, the nicotine is chew is a hell of a lot more then a sig but it is not the nicotine that is the worst part, it is the OTHER chemicals they put into it. Yeah, the nicotine is bad but not as bad as you would think. Also, if you have never dipped before and you jump straight to the good stuff Cope snuff, you will get a serious head rush and may even puke. A friend of mine like to mix it with some "white lightning" for a real kick.
Most people that chew and go through a can or more a day are just trying to get that fix that you get when first starting to use chew because the nicotine is waaaaay addictive, even more so then with cigs. You will see 'em put a pinch in, spit it out 10min later etc. when in actuality that pinch will last a good hour or two.
I smoked while trying it... didn't get kicked off. However, I had to take the laptop out to my front porch as I don't smoke in my house ;) Wouldn't want get kicked out of there :0
i will suffer through it.....go a head and smoke all you want....hell even smoke a couple for me....
I'm having issues with 002, but I left it up for others to test. I also created 003 for further testing. Please try both and report any issues.
I posted an issue with the project maintainer for the weird issue I've been having:
Seems to be working for me, the double oh too it does.
002 worked for me.
testchat001 died for some reason. It will be deleted as soon as I figure out how. Try it out with testchat002, which seems fine at the moment.
to test this out but alas i am headed to work