That’s what I’m thinking – maybe not even having a title just an index like [1] that’s a hyperlink plus a seperate table that’s more like a bibliography. The actual timeline page still uses lists rather than tables.
The USSR systematically overstated their population overall, and for specific cities for decades. A standard way to estimate population is through logistics – road nets, rail lines, water traffic and domestic food production. You have to move enough food and fuel into a city to sustain its population. CIA demographers and economists knew the USSR cities and aggregate population were exaggerated because the logistics net made the claimed population impossible.
For the seven billion figure I have no idea if it is accurate
As michaeleochaidh says, embedding the Hyperlink would leave more room for the important part, the descriptive text, thus making it more readable.
2015/5/10
John Scalzi posts an essay on why he regards the Hugos as not broken. “he flaw is fixable by addressing the nomination process so that a) slating is made more difficult, while b) the fundamental popular character of the Hugos (i.e., anyone can vote and nominate) is retained. There are a number of ways to do this (the simplest would be to allow folks to nominate three works/people in each category and have six finalist slots on the ballot; there are more complicated ways as well), but the point is that there are options.”
Source: John Scalzi’s blog
Note that the beginning “T” in the quote above has been dropped off in this and the original timeline.
Note also that BT’s “apology” in the 2015/5/4 entry consisted of saying he was sorry that he implied Scalzi is gay, as if being gay were something to be insulted about.
I was just re-reading the April 2016 discussion on Eric Flint’s blog item ‘But for Wales?’, and noticed one contributor crediting Camestros for the translation ‘Hey, I lost my reading glasses again’ applicable when one encounters a long, blinkered, and irrelevant rant like a typical James May post. Hoc verum est, Camestros? ‘T’is genius, if so.
What happened to James May anyway? He used to dump his lengthy rants anyplace that didn’t ban him fast enough and then there was the novel length screed about women trying to take over SFF (in which he mentioned me along with pretty much every other woman who as much as breathed a word about SF) on his website. But I haven’t seen him or his rants in quite some time now.
Camestros Felapton 
16 responses to “Ignore this…”
Ignore it? It’s like a train wreck–I can’t look away.
Since I made a smart-ass remark, I am going to have to make a constructive suggestion: why don’t you link to the article instead of using the whole URL? I mean, http://www.thehugoawards.org/2016/05/two-2016-hugo-award-finalists-withdraw-replacements-named/ is pretty long and doesn’t fit neatly into a table the way “Hugo Awards Site” would.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s what I’m thinking – maybe not even having a title just an index like [1] that’s a hyperlink plus a seperate table that’s more like a bibliography. The actual timeline page still uses lists rather than tables.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The USSR systematically overstated their population overall, and for specific cities for decades. A standard way to estimate population is through logistics – road nets, rail lines, water traffic and domestic food production. You have to move enough food and fuel into a city to sustain its population. CIA demographers and economists knew the USSR cities and aggregate population were exaggerated because the logistics net made the claimed population impossible.
For the seven billion figure I have no idea if it is accurate
LikeLike
I think you meant to post this on the other post.
LikeLike
You are right. I was using a tablet.
LikeLike
As michaeleochaidh says, embedding the Hyperlink would leave more room for the important part, the descriptive text, thus making it more readable.
2015/5/10
John Scalzi posts an essay on why he regards the Hugos as not broken. “he flaw is fixable by addressing the nomination process so that a) slating is made more difficult, while b) the fundamental popular character of the Hugos (i.e., anyone can vote and nominate) is retained. There are a number of ways to do this (the simplest would be to allow folks to nominate three works/people in each category and have six finalist slots on the ballot; there are more complicated ways as well), but the point is that there are options.”
Source: John Scalzi’s blog
Note that the beginning “T” in the quote above has been dropped off in this and the original timeline.
Note also that BT’s “apology” in the 2015/5/4 entry consisted of saying he was sorry that he implied Scalzi is gay, as if being gay were something to be insulted about.
LikeLiked by 2 people
^ what JJ said about the last.
LikeLike
“I’m just trying some format issues with the timeline.”
Great, now the 17th century is in italics, the 1430s are right-justified, and all the Ming Dynasty hyperlinks are broken.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Also, the two comments in 2016/2/{8|10} refer to Bruce Schneider rather than Schneier.
LikeLike
I was just re-reading the April 2016 discussion on Eric Flint’s blog item ‘But for Wales?’, and noticed one contributor crediting Camestros for the translation ‘Hey, I lost my reading glasses again’ applicable when one encounters a long, blinkered, and irrelevant rant like a typical James May post. Hoc verum est, Camestros? ‘T’is genius, if so.
LikeLike
Lol! I don’t recall coming up with that for James Mays posts but it’s funny enough that I’ll take the credit.
LikeLike
What happened to James May anyway? He used to dump his lengthy rants anyplace that didn’t ban him fast enough and then there was the novel length screed about women trying to take over SFF (in which he mentioned me along with pretty much every other woman who as much as breathed a word about SF) on his website. But I haven’t seen him or his rants in quite some time now.
LikeLike
I think he might have been anti-Trump and started avoiding Trump sympathetic places. I vaguely recall somebody saying that but I don’t know where.
LikeLike
Let’s just be thankful he’s not leaving his screeds around where we might run into them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m wondering about Sandifer’s pronoun. Maybe ask them how they’d like to be referred to in this?
LikeLike
I thought I’d changed the pronouns – thanks for spotting that
LikeLike