If anyone was wondering about the amount of on-topic posting that goes on here, I was bored and I counted up the number of on-topic posts so far (out of 50, currently).

The magic number came to 12, which doesn't surprise me in the least.

I think a good addition to the comments section would be to add an "on-topic post" tally, out of the total posts. A staff member could skim the posts and tally them up himself, or a check button could be added to the posting page that lets the poster decide if what he is saying is actually on-topic. Maybe that would reduce the amount of off-topic posting. I dunno. It's worth a shot.

~ferich

Did you count what you just said as on topic? What about things that have one or two lines that are on topic, but a paragraph or so that are off topic? Seems kinda silly to me...
- Matt

No, my comment wasn't totalled when I counted them all up. The main page only said 50 comments; mine hadn't yet been added to the comment page.

I just felt like doing that because the topic seemed to change (by popular opinion) to off-topic comments.

~ferich

What do you mean the topics have changed to off-topic comments? The news item was basically off-topic to begin with, having almost nothing to do with TI graphing calculators. Plus, it was more than a month old. I don't know how you can expect many on-topic comments...

What I meant was that the comment topic has seemed change to "off-topicness" or "off-topicity," however you want to say it. :) I wasn't referring to the original article. I do think that it is somewhat related to the site's interests, however it is not currently pertinent or relevant due to its extremely late fashion. I do agree with Kirk's comment above in relation to a graphing calculator's "colors," and in that way it doesn't relate to ticalc.org at all, but in the way that the programming in very closely related to z80 programming, then it has some bearing on this site.

On a side note, I was visiting some other web pages and found several hicolor experiments with the GBC posted before Icarus' discovery actually took place, which makes me wonder about the validity of their "discovery." Of course, it may be valid, as they may have experimented with it legitly, and just conquered the barrier at a later date.

~ferich

As pointed out in some comments above, the CPU in the GB is more like the Intel 8080 than the Z80...

I think that comment may be valid, but the majority of webpages that describe the GB's CPU call it "a work-alike Z80." Only on this comment board have I seen the GB's CPU compared to an 8080 in terms of its architecture and commands. I'm not saying that's wrong, I'm just saying that everywhere else I look for GB CPU programming info, I'm referred to the Z80 due to their similarities. I haven't programmed 8080 code, so I can't say that I'm absolutely right, but I have compared Z80 and GB code, and they're very similar.

~ferich

--"Open to correction..."

Z80 itself is quite similar to 8080...

Frankly, I think the staff could spent their "valuable" time doing more important things, such as actually testing the files! :)

Really, I couldn't more agree.

I wrote one sentence in the comment, AlienCow: "And I'd like world peace" or something to that effect.

*sigh*

--BlueCalx

That's correct. And by responding rather than deleting the comment, you acknowledged that you thought the comment was okay. But then somebody went and deleted it, including your comment. It looks a bit bad when you guys dig yourself in a hole and then delete it to cover it up.