Originally posted by STANGSTANG, you're being an ass; I fail to see how that post was a request to fill two half pages with information we all can get easily elsewhere. It's that type of useless space wasting post that manages to annoy even those who generally agree with your political views. Stop being a petulant jerk.
My posts were in response from one by DreamLax, who is quoted below. I too get annoyed by American-centric geography. It even affects my export business. Americans refer to their states by initials like MA as if the rest of the world lives in America. I listed the states and then I listed the rest of the world.
"Whenever you fill out an online form, and y ...[text shortened]... merican over IRC:
"Where are you from?"
"New Zealand"
"Oh, what state is that in?"
Originally posted by STANGThat is because the vast majority of web sites are located in America and frequented
My posts were in response from one by DreamLax, who is quoted below. I too get annoyed by American-centric geography. It even affects my export business. Americans refer to their states by initials like MA as if the rest of the world lives in America. I listed the states and then I listed the rest of the world.
"Whenever you fill out an online form, and y ...[text shortened]... merican over IRC:
"Where are you from?"
"New Zealand"
"Oh, what state is that in?"
by Americans.
Nemesio
Originally posted by STANG
Nemesio, you need to do some thorough research into the history of threads when I first started posting.
I visit the forums many times a day. I remember when you started posting. You had
one topic. No one wanted to discuss it. That's life. Yes, your topic was good, but your
arrogance made it such that people who even agreed with you weren't interested.
You will find that I posed some serious questions regarding how the balance of power will change in the world and the implications if violence continues to be used.
Your slippery-slope theories upon theories are no more compelling than Ivanhoe's.
You will find very few replies other than patriotic and/or stupidly critical ones.
Again, that's life. You'll just have to learn to deal.
Out of dismay, I decided to take the approach of getting messages out there even if the messenger gets shot.
Sadly, this wasn't your only option. I've tried to point you in other directions, but you are
damaged goods now. You've spent what social capital you have and that's why you get
banned at the drop of a hat. You're wearing a scarlet letter, and continuing in the practices
that got you that letter won't serve your greater cause.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioThat doesn't mean that a web site should be created with the assumption that only Americans are going to visit it. That would be like exporting goods that are only useful in the country that is exporting them.
That is because the vast majority of web sites are located in America and frequented
by Americans.
Nemesio
Originally posted by DreamlaXIt doesn't. The forms are Americanocentric because, mostly, it is Americans
That doesn't mean that a web site should be created with the assumption that only Americans are going to visit it. That would be like exporting goods that are only useful in the country that is exporting them.
who visit them. They don't require that Americans fill them out; if you don't
have a 'State' and "Zip Code,' then you leave them blank. By putting USA at
the top of an otherwise alphabetical list, you are simply making the form easier
to fill out for the majority of people who are going to fill it out. There is no
exclusion going on, just creating a more expedient form for the majority of
people who fill it out.
Nemesio
Originally posted by DreamlaXShould it be in every language, too? Should there be a form to
It should be if it is globally available.
conform to all of the different postal styles of every country in
the world with internet access?
This is nonsensical. If the overwhelming majority of your clientele
is necessarily going to come from a certain region, to standardize
your internet forms to expedite things for that clientele. That's good
business.
Similarly, if you make the form exclusive to that group, then you
are going to lose money. That's bad business.
So, making forms that work most easily for people from the US but
flexible so that other people can use them, is the ideal balance.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioFedEx international couriers have a form with a guide to international post codes. No, things do not need to be American-centric.
Should it be in every language, too? Should there be a form to
conform to all of the different postal styles of every country in
the world with internet access?
This is nonsensical. If the overwhelming majority of your clientele
is necessarily going to come from a certain region, to standardize
your internet forms to expedite things for that cliente ...[text shortened]... le from the US but
flexible so that other people can use them, is the ideal balance.
Nemesio
By the way, most of the world is adoping smart card based debit and credit cards, with the notable exception of America. That's just one example. China and the "United States of Europe" are rising as the new super power.
Sincerely, America is becoming redundant and I fear what the knee-jerk reaction will be when violence is the established policy.
Originally posted by STANG
FedEx international couriers have a form with a guide to international post codes. No, things do not need to be American-centric.
I never said things need to be Americocentric. FedEx probably gets a lot of international
business so it is in their interest to provide international form styles.
However, if a web site gets say, 90% of its business from the US, 5% from the UK, and 5%
from the rest of the world, it makes no sense to make forms that would work in Lebanon. Doing
so costs money and wouldn't bring in money. Bad business.
You were the one using words like 'should' and 'need,' not I. If a site doesn't make forms
that conform to a particular region, it loses business. If it loses enough business (and it is smart)
then it will change.
Here is an example. About six months ago, I was looking for a particular motet on CD. The only
recording I could find was a disc that was released by an English Choir out of their church. It was,
essentially a private label, a CD released to raise money for their church and not really made for
public distribution, much less international distribution. On their web site, everything was listed
in pounds and used only English mail-system. They never expected an American to want to buy
their CD. I emailed and asked if there were any way I could purchase the CD; that is, could I use
American dollars and could it be shipped to America? If he had responded 'no,' then he would have
lost my business (and, if this request was sufficiently infrequent, then perhaps he would have).
However, he had dealt with this sort of thing before and told me the hoops I had to jump through
in order to purchase it. I gladly did it.
You see, I understood that I had no right to impose that he include instructions on his
site for international purchase. I understood that I had no right to demand a form
which conformed to my needs. It's his right to tell me to sod off, if he wants, because,
ultimately, he is the one who suffers if he doesn't conform.
Similarly, if there really becomes a demand for RHP to have international appeal -- a need to have
the site in spanish, french or chinese, for example, -- Russ (if he is a smart businessman) will
respond.
Your boycot will send a message (if you have other people willing to do so). If you are alone,
then that's tough; that's business.
By the way, most of the world is adoping smart card based debit and credit cards, with the notable exception of America. That's just one example. China and the "United States of Europe" are rising as the new super power.
I'm glad for China and USE. Maybe this will humble the USA. I don't care if, one day, we aren't
the superpower we are now. Perhaps we wouldn't start wars for obscure and untenable reasons.
Sincerely, America is becoming redundant and I fear what the knee-jerk reaction will be when violence is the established policy.
The former statement makes no sense (what do you mean 'redundant'😉 and, I, too, fear for a
world where violence is the first course of action as opposed to the last.
Nemesio
Originally posted by DreamlaXThey should only bother to localize it if:
The number of Coca Cola drinkers in New Zealand is minimal to the amount in America. According to what you say, they shouldn't bother to localise it by changing the ingredients such as "coloring" to "colouring". What about Niue, Samoa, and Tonga?
1) Not doing so costs them business; and
2) Doing so costs less than the business they would receive by doing it.
And whether they do so or not isn't about moral 'rights' and 'wrongs,'
in any event. There is no 'should' or 'should not.' It's about business.
If you think Coca Cola is interested in political causes, then you are
dreaming. They are only interested in increasing the bottom line.
And what about Niue, Samoa, and Tonga? The same logic above
applies.
Nemesio
Sincerely, America is becoming redundant and I fear what the knee-jerk reaction will be when violence is the established policy.America, as a nation, and much of the world currently sees America as being of upmost importance on the world-scale. It has supreme military capability and weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) but it is the police that we all need. It has the economy by which others measure themselves (e.g. my own price list is presented in US dollars to other countries) and others bow to pressure on trade agreements.
The former statement makes no sense (what do you mean 'redundant'😉 and, I, too, fear for a
world where violence is the first course of action as opposed to the last.
Nemesio[/b]
It is my fear that when this importance is no longer the case, America, the playgound bully, will become violent or those that have been bullied will finally retaliate. My guess is that the bully will be the first to use WMDs but it doesn't make much difference in the end.
Violence must cease to be policy.
Originally posted by STANGYou can't say this:
America, as a nation, and much of the world currently sees America as being of upmost importance on the world-scale. It has supreme military capability and weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) but it is the police that we all need. It has the economy by which others measure themselves (e.g. my own price list is presented in US dollars to other countries) and oth ...[text shortened]... o use WMDs but it doesn't make much difference in the end.
Violence must cease to be policy.
but it is the police that we all need
and consistently say this:
Violence must cease to be policy
regarding the United States. The world does not need the US to "police" it and those who insist it do so are assuring violence on a grand scale as there will always be resistance to foreigners telling people what to do. The only rational policy to reduce violence worldwide is for the US and the Western powers to cease their meddling in Third World countries' internal affairs.