1. @redenchilada There you go :)

    Sunday, 27-May-12 16:16:06 UTC from web
    1. @ironwill Try replacing out.write("status=" + URLEncoder.encode(msg, "UTF-8")); with out.write("status=" + URLEncoder.encode(msg, "UTF-8") + "&source=" + URLEncoder.encode("ham is delicious", "UTF-8"));

      Sunday, 27-May-12 16:19:18 UTC from web
      1. @redenchilada Thanks, i'll try that now.

        Sunday, 27-May-12 16:20:04 UTC from web
      2. @redenchilada Aha! It worked! You are a genius, thank you :P

        Sunday, 27-May-12 16:21:58 UTC from web
        1. @ironwill Here you go. My background. I made it for myself, but im giving it to you because minecraft.

          Sunday, 27-May-12 16:24:12 UTC from web
          1. @techdisk42 That's pretty awesome. xD

            Sunday, 27-May-12 16:24:46 UTC from web
            1. @minti @ironwill i made a world, built the logo in a cool place, then flymodded up and screenshotted fullscreen, been my background ever since.

              Sunday, 27-May-12 16:27:07 UTC from web
              1. @techdisk42 xD Well it definitely turned out to be awesome. Too bad it's too small and not poni or I'd use it as mine too. #

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:29:53 UTC from web
          2. @techdisk42 :O Is so pretty!

            Sunday, 27-May-12 16:25:36 UTC from web
      3. @redenchilada *clap*

        Sunday, 27-May-12 16:22:49 UTC from web
        1. @minti *clop*

          Sunday, 27-May-12 16:23:44 UTC from web

        Sunday, 27-May-12 16:23:47 UTC from web

          Sunday, 27-May-12 16:24:26 UTC from web
          1. @redenchilada Well, in fairness, I don't know whether there's a better way built into Java. But at the very least, you could put parameters in a hash (with name as key, value as... well, value), and have one function that urlencodes values, puts strings along the lines of "{KEY}={URLENCODED VALUE}" into a list and joins the whole list together with "&" as a separator. More complex, but removes the need to repeat concatenation and urlencoding everywhere.

            Sunday, 27-May-12 16:29:00 UTC from web
          2. @redenchilada But like I said, I don't know that aspect of Java. For all I know, it already has something that does that for you. Either way, manual concatenation seems like a lot of extra typing for nothing. :/

            Sunday, 27-May-12 16:30:07 UTC from web
            1. @bitshift >select >copy >paste

              Sunday, 27-May-12 16:31:10 UTC from web
            2. @bitshift @redenchilada I'm not gonna lie, the way I've got this going _works_ - surely that's all that matters?

              Sunday, 27-May-12 16:32:23 UTC from web
              1. @ironwill Generally as a coder, the idealology of "It works, don't change it." is very bad but, eh. xD

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:33:51 UTC from web
                1. @minti Yeah, I know. But it's really hot today, and I have a short patience xD

                  Sunday, 27-May-12 16:39:21 UTC from web
                  1. @ironwill xD Good enough of a reason for me.

                    Sunday, 27-May-12 16:39:55 UTC from web
              2. @ironwill If you don't plan to come back and make changes to it later, sure.

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:34:00 UTC from web
              3. @ironwill To elaborate on that: for big or long-running projects, you should make sure it's possible to change things later without going slowly mad. (For example, if you needed to change to a different encoding function, your current approach would need you to change several different places.) But for small enough, or write-once-and-then-just-let-it-keep-running-how-it-is projects (both sound like they fit what you're doing), there's much less reason to care. :)

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:40:00 UTC from web
                1. @bitshift That's okay. I'm already mostly mad. :3

                  Sunday, 27-May-12 16:42:56 UTC from web
            3. @bitshift I also must inquire why I haven't gotten any flak from you for manually coding my requests with Sockets instead of finding a better method :p

              Sunday, 27-May-12 16:40:41 UTC from web
              1. @redenchilada Mainly because I've not seen the code, I suspect. :P

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:41:17 UTC from web
              2. @redenchilada Not sure why you would, though, given that java has such a thing as a (

                Sunday, 27-May-12 16:43:25 UTC from web
                1. @bitshift I think I tried to use that and didn't have the willingness to figure it out before going back to the Sockets that I'm oh-so-familiar with.

                  Sunday, 27-May-12 16:46:11 UTC from web
                  1. @redenchilada Fair enough, but it just seems... wrong, for lack of a better term... to me to use sockets and manually assemble requests, when the library has something that already builds requests (and most likely can also do other things). :/

                    Sunday, 27-May-12 16:49:02 UTC from web
                    1. @bitshift I'm infuriatingly stubborn about doing everything in the most difficult way possible. Plus I can use Sockets for other things (like if I write an online game at some point!)

                      Sunday, 27-May-12 16:50:54 UTC from web
                2. @bitshift Also looking at an implementation of it, it looks like more code even without adding authentication. :x

                  Sunday, 27-May-12 16:48:58 UTC from web
        2. @bitshift WHY DON'T _YOU_ SHOW HIM HOW TO DO IT BETTER

          Sunday, 27-May-12 16:25:09 UTC from web