Re: TIB: Re: RE: Proposal: To weed out useless and no good TI-BASIC prog
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TIB: Re: RE: Proposal: To weed out useless and no good TI-BASIC programs o
The Garth Johnson wrote:
> ---Bryan Rabeler <brabeler@isd.ingham.k12.mi.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > TGaArdvark@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > > How about having several categories to rate the programs by?
> have a
> > > > compactness of the programming (if the author did everything
> using the
> > > > least amount of code possible), the usefulness of a program
> (could be
> > > > how fun a game is), and some other category.
> > > >
> > > > Instead of having a 4/5 star system, use a 3 star. It would be a
> > > > yes/no/sorta system if the author did whatever the criteria are.
> > >
> > > You can only fit so much in 640 pixels. And that just means more
> > > work. I agree that this would be the best system if it were not so
> > > much more work than the others. 3 stars is a smart idea. Maybe
> > > some other picture might be better though so people will expect
> > > 3 instead of 4 or 5. Maybe thumbs up or something... Dunno.
> >
> > That's true, we are getting a little cramped for space after we
> added the
> > date column. But I think we still have room, since the filename and
> size
> > columns seem to be very far apart.
> >
> > --
> > Bryan Rabeler <brabeler@ticalc.org>
> > File Archives, HTML, and Support
> > the ticalc.org project - http://www.ticalc.org/
> >
> >
> >
>
> as long as you are changing the archives, how about grouping files
> according to type? Why not put those 10 minesweepers right next to
> one another so that they can be compared. I know that alphabetical
> order is the best way to have it, but if things are grouped in
> categories it is easier.
Are you proposing we do /83/games/arcade/ and /83/games/strategy/ etc etc?
--
Bryan Rabeler <brabeler@ticalc.org>
File Archives, HTML, and Support
the ticalc.org project - http://www.ticalc.org/
References: