<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for PeteWilliams</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/PeteWilliams/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/PeteWilliams/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:16:41 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: GeekMEAT – Attending?</title><link>http://attending.io/events/geekmeat#comment-994268677</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Cool, the 10th works better for me :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:16:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Homemade British Bangers and the Search for Rusk</title><link>http://www.thepauperedchef.com/article/homemade-british-bangers-and-the-search-for-rusk#comment-821914266</link><description>&lt;p&gt;A banger should NEVER be pricked! That let's all the fat out, and let's not forget - fat means flavour! A modern British sausage won't explode anyway so it's not something you need to worry about.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2013 08:29:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Homemade British Bangers and the Search for Rusk</title><link>http://www.thepauperedchef.com/article/homemade-british-bangers-and-the-search-for-rusk#comment-821912407</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi, as a sausage-making Englishman I admire your quest to reach the pinacle of sausagery, however i can spot some room for improvement… I wouldn't mix your meat and seasonings by machine - it looks like it is turning it to mush. You should try and do it by hand - and gently. A good banger will be relatively course - the cross-section of yours looks over-processed. I suspect the over-enthusiastic mixing turned your meat to a paste, rather than keeping it fairly mince-like. Of course, if you're happy with your sausage then none of this matters - just thought I'd let you know how you could make it more like a proper British banger.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pete&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2013 08:26:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dear ICO, Sue Us</title><link>http://nocookielaw.com/#comment-646572486</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It's (always been) pretty clear that the ICO have no interest in prosecuting anyone over this daft law that the EU has insisted they implement. I'm sure the ICO are more annoyed about it that any of us geeks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;They've given enough winks and nudges to let us know not to worry about it but people are still getting their knickers in a twist. How exactly are they idiots?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don't really understand your point - you seem to be annoyed that the ICO aren't suing everyone?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2012 06:21:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fixing Registration &amp;amp; Login Forms – Passwords : Nexus Technologies LLC Software Consulting Milwaukee, WI</title><link>http://www.nexustechnologiesllc.com/blog/fixing-registration-and-login-forms-passwords/#comment-35850071</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I like the concept, but I'd recommend putting the checkbox before the password field, else most people will fill in the field, and then see the option. This idea is expanded on in this post: &lt;a href="http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2010/02/how-does-your-web-form-flow/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2010/02/how-does-your-web-form-flow/"&gt;http://www.goodusability.co...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:37:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Google Google Tradutor</title><link>http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=pt-BR&amp;sl=en&amp;tl=pt&amp;u=http://2010book.tumblr.com/post/313562123/as-you-walk-around-the-house-you-can-feel-that&amp;rurl=translate.google.com.br&amp;usg=ALkJrhi1ncjIbtWMBmMkKIxz_C00z0ob0w#comment-29996319</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think he just went with the jumpsuit theory to make the artwork easier…&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:24:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: No Precedence For Social Media &amp;#8211; Amazon Hangs Us Out To&amp;nbsp;Dry</title><link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/amazon-affiliates-social-media/11654/#comment-42043375</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the reply Joshua,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; I spoke to Amazon UK about this, and they say links posted on twitter DO earn commission:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"Dear Associate,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for writing to the &lt;a href="http://Amazon.co.uk" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="Amazon.co.uk"&gt;Amazon.co.uk&lt;/a&gt; Associates Program.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In relation to your e-mail below, links posted on Twitter do earn commission. Any items ordered via your links will register to your Associate account and you will earn referral fees according to the Performance Fee Plan which you are currently enrolled in."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'll send a response now and see if they have a problem with URL shorteners either.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pete&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:09:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Affiliate Links in Twitter, Amazon Says No</title><link>http://www.jangro.com/affiliate-marketing/affiliate-links-in-twitter-amazon-says-no/#comment-22777803</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well I spoke to Amazon UK about this, and they don't seem to have a problem with it:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"Dear Associate,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thank you for writing to the &lt;a href="http://Amazon.co.uk" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="Amazon.co.uk"&gt;Amazon.co.uk&lt;/a&gt; Associates Program.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In relation to your e-mail below, links posted on Twitter do earn commission. Any items ordered via your links will register to your Associate account and you will earn referral fees according to the Performance Fee Plan which you are currently enrolled in."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Pete&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:07:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: No Precedence For Social Media &amp;#8211; Amazon Hangs Us Out To&amp;nbsp;Dry</title><link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/amazon-affiliates-social-media/11654/#comment-42043373</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I was wondering if this was the case as someone said they purchased through one of my links posted on twitter, but Amazon did not register it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Seems pretty unreasonable to me, and I can't see any reason for it other than to save Amazon money.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Does anyone know if it is the URL shortners that are the problem, or just posting on sites that aren't yours? What about the twitter widget I have on my site, would clicks form this count...? I wonder how they determine it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, if anyone is interested, I've just released a 1kb JavaScript file that converts any Amazon product links on your page into affiliated links to your visitor’s local Amazon store. So US visitors will get a .com link, whilst UK visitors will get a .co.uk link to the same product.&lt;br&gt;Free download at: &lt;a href="http://petewilliams.info/blog/2009/07/javascript-amazon-associate-link-localiser/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://petewilliams.info/blog/2009/07/javascript-amazon-associate-link-localiser/"&gt;http://petewilliams.info/bl...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:41:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: UI Scraps: user interface designs found by Jason Robb</title><link>http://uiscraps.tumblr.com/post/121835691#comment-11539095</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I too would also tab to this field and then type to select. The problem here though, is that the length of the selectbox suggests that the field uses month names, rather than number so I'd be typing S for September and getting nowhere.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Would be interesting to see what percentage of people use mouse vs keyboard on these fields. Anyone got any data?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:41:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Photo of the day: No breastfeeding</title><link>http://whitneyhess.com/blog/2009/05/photo-of-the-day-no-breastfeeding/#comment-9138428</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'd love to know the backstory on this one! Just how breastfed teenagers did they have to put up with before putting up the sign??&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PeteWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 16:01:15 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>