20 years - a stroll down memory lane

I'm another one that has been here some time now and been a regular visitor since registering. Over the years I've swayed between different sections of the forums as interests have changed, and oddly seeing what OcUK is about the sections I haven't visited in years have been the PC hardware ones.

Did a couple of meets in the early days, one down in Kent I think and some of the motors ones.

One thing I do remember was some chap possibly named Sequoia that used to post loads about his life and many of the high end expensive things he owned, then iirc it was proven to all be a load of bull and fake.
 
I was here 2004 although I did use the shop slightly before that in 2003.

Think the nuke happened in 2002?

I remember some of our inside jokes / memes such as lolkwerk, smash that pasty, 'photoshop this!' threads, boxing stance, Hovis, corner sofa and Gucci belt. Most of these were from 2010s, not as far back as 2004.

OcUK is definitely is the forum I've used for the longest by far. A handful of non-forum sites that I've used for longer are: eBay and PayPal (2001), Jungle.com / Argos (1999), AOL (1996). I still use the AOL as a backup / 2FA for my Gmail.
 
GSXRMovistar said:
Did a couple of meets in the early days, one down in Kent I think...
Click to expand...
That might have been the first UOcUK Lan, which was held in a little village hall. 2001ish? Does this ring any bells?

LAN4-Neilos.jpg
 
Skeptic said:
I (as in me [myself {the entity that goes by “me”}]) like this thread (on OcUK [a computer forum {on the internet}]).
Click to expand...

A linguistic masterpiece.



The “bracket system”, or “bracketing system” (as named by myself).

One of the major hindrances (I believe) of communication (in both verbal, and written forms) is the ambiguity of the content. (How can one understand a text [for example] if it is ambiguous?).

I have developed (and implemented) a system (the “bracket system”, or “bracketing system” [as named by myself]) which can help to combat this (thus bringing much more efficient means of communication).

I have found (generally through communication on Internet forums [but also in verbal communication {in increased proportion (it seems)}]) that there can be many problems if one does not include detail in communication. If one does not have detail in a communication, it is then possible for a piece of text (for example) to be misunderstood (and thus cause some form of argument [or incorrect discussion {which decreases efficiency}]).

The problem one has to solve (to combat this issue [or attempt to combat it]) is developing a humanly readable way to contain detail. This already exists (written text [in normal form]). I have found (through experience) that this is a rather inefficient method (for the reader) to communicate. Some information is vitally important to the reader (in order that they understand the communication [a text {for example}]), and other information is not as important to the reader (if they plan on reading the information [and not necessarily making any analytical points upon it]).

One can group data in order to judge how important it is to the reader (in terms of the aforementioned actions [in other terms, one must ensure that there is a category {or group} for data that it essential, a category {or group} for data that is less essential, and so on.]). Groups are useful in this sense (I believe) as one can easily handle a large text (as a set of groups), and format accordingly.

It is a good idea to use some form of separator which does not imply a specific reading method (in other terms, using a comma [as opposed to a “bracket”] would be a bad idea as it implies that one should read the text which immediately succeeds it [thus negating the increased efficiency possible with such a system {as the “bracket system”, or “bracketing system” (as named by myself)}]).

The use of “brackets” (I find) is the best method. It encapsulates (so to speak) the text in a manner which does not imply a specific method of reading. (It is noteworthy [perhaps imperative {at this point}] that the reading of “brackets” should be changed after the reading of this text. One is expected to grasp the concept that the brackets are optional for people [in some cases]).

The choice of “brackets” has been made such that efficiency is (hopefully) increased in the writer. Text which is important to the reader (in other terms, text that has a value of importance to the reader which is above the threshold value [in the opinion of the writer] of importance for it to be mandatory [in a sense] to read) is placed as normal text would be (in other terms, without “brackets”). Text which is the next most important (in other terms, falls into the second group of importance) will be placed in the “()” “brackets”. This choice was made as people tend to use these “brackets” in normal text, and due to the greater probability of the second importance-level of text being used, than the third (for example), it seems logical to use these “brackets”.

Text which can be placed into the third group of importance are placed into the “[]” “brackets”. This is because if one compares it to the “{}” “brackets” (explained later in this text), one can see that when one types these (or, in fact, writes them), it is a much easier task. This means that they (the “[]” “brackets”) are used for the third group of text, because it has a greater probability of occurring that the fourth group (for example).

The fourth group of text (rather self-evidently, uses the “{}” “brackets”). (One should repeat the “([{}])” thereafter [for further levels]).

The idea behind the “bracket system”, or “bracketing system” (as named by myself) is not necessarily for every reader to read all of the text. If one has a lot of time, (and possibly wants to comment upon the text [in an analytical manner {for example}]), one should read all the text. If one does not have the time in which to read the whole text, (and possibly [therefore], does not have the time to comment upon the text), one should simply read the up to the necessary level of “brackets” (such that time is used efficiently [and the basic meaning of the text is understood]).

A person who has not the time to read the text entirely, should not comment upon it (until they have read all the detail).

This can solve the problem of arguments occurring due to misunderstanding of text (for example, [there are other problems that this solves {I cite arguments for simplicity of explanation}]). If a person has access to the extra detail, this person does not have to ask for it, or assume the writer did not include it through ignorance (for example), which would cause an argument (or unnecessary debate).

The “brackets” could be treated (by a user who intends to read the text entirely) like commas (in other terms, they can attribute the same implied reading style [as commas] to the “brackets”). It is not useful (as previously mentioned) for the writer to replace the “brackets” with commas though, as this negates the possible increase in efficiency for the reader.

Angus Higgins
Click to expand...
 
Scuzi said:
Speaking to an old friend this evening, it occurred to me that I’ve been a member of this forum for over 20 years now. I think I technically should have broken the china sometime earlier this year, maybe March. I don’t think I have been attached to anything other than my dwindling family (and maybe Sizzler, ho ho) for quite so long.

I still recognise a few of the old guard posting, but not as much as they used to. A bit like myself - life goes on.

So, with your sepia tinted wayfarers donned, what are your lasting memories from the early days of these forums?

I’ll throw a couple of references to some memories out to see if anyone remembers. My memory has mostly faded but I’m interested to see what can resurface.
  • Portable sun
  • The Nuke
  • Swansea “Welsh Wales” meets
  • The Broadband photoshops
  • Penis bleaching
Click to expand...

Donnydoos and ubidoos.

Trying to keep up with spie etc driving around Stoke.

The stomp monster and seti crunching.

Athlon axia and pencil modding.
 
Lopéz said:
The Greatest Dancer, who made eccentric case mods including a PC inside an IKEA table/storage box thing with massive industrial ducting, and also cut a window in the motherboard side of his case or something along those lines.

Scuzi drinking aftershave (I still have the video)

Too many to list really.
Click to expand...

For some reason I still remember that absolute shed of a VW golf you drove to one of the Stoke events with the 'multidirectional suspension'...
 
Feek said:
Both combined into one now - Donnies and ooobiedoos at the same event. We're well overdue now because we missed it last year although the two we had in 2018 made up for that. One in Stoke and one in Berlin. I think without a doubt that EuroDonnyDo III in Berlin was the best one ever.
Click to expand...

Amazing how much time has passed when you think about it, I left the mod team in 2006, which is 15 years ago now :eek:

So much change over the years, marriage, kids, jobs, and yet this place is still going as strong as ever, still offering as much even as needs change.
 
Whenever I used brackets in an email or report I feel like the bracketing system wore off on me slightly.

n*

Broadband posts were amusing, slightly tragic when he idolised diamondmark.

I also used to work with GTA. Weird bloke, lives in Singapore now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom