Kyoto Kaputin?


According to Colby Cosh, the Protocol can only happen if Russia says "da," and Vladimir Putin is not acting particularly agreeable.


NEXT: Location, Location, Location

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Beware of Russians with an oil pipeline (to China and/or Japan) to sell you.

  2. “The whole world is waiting with bated breath on what Russia’s going to do,” Rajendra Pachauri told Reuters of Moscow’s delays in ratifying the United Nations’ Kyoto Protocol. “We need to know one way or another.”

    I was wondering why I felt short of air.

    Not that it matters. It’s the middle of 2003. The treaty runs till 2010. By the time the Reds (we can’t call them Reds anymore, can we?) approve the treaty and the infrastructure is designed and agreed upon and executed, the treat will have expired into the footnotes of tomorrow’s history books.

    Not that it matters. See this Reason article for the *reason* why:

  3. We can call the GOP reds now, being that is the color for states voting for Bush on the national election results map.

  4. I wouldn’t expect Russia to sign this. Afterall, where do you think the secret oil pipeline in Afgansitan goes???

  5. ^ i dunno, to sponsor the ZIonists?

    just a guess

  6. God that’s one ugly website Colby’s got there.

  7. It’s two columns of text. Which letters and punctuation marks, exactly, do you find ugly? If the complaint’s with the photo in the top right corner, I’ll have no choice but to plead guilty.

  8. I think we’ve all seen worse sites. But I hated looking at the menu. That blue on the left is blinding – particluarly harsh with the white and black text and MIXED caps. Using a different font (ie. Arial, Helvetica, ANY sans serif) will make things easier to read.

    Now THIS is a crappy website … if not entertaining: I believe that is 61 1s.

  9. I’m not mean, it’s just the layout is hard to look at. The blue table is a killer on the eyes & the text inside it is too close together, and too small, and hard to read.

    There’s too much stuff in the menu. If you just had the headings with maybe a little description of what’s inside the subjects might be more inviting. The way it looks now is like you’d have spend a lot of time trying to find out what’s behind all those links. Time we probably can’t spare.

    Look how the Reason site sets up their articles — in space and half type, with lots of white space around it. Makes it very easy to read.

    Good luck. Didn’t mean to be cruel.

  10. Ah, well, as it happens, I’m stone-cold colour-blind, so be aware that you are officially Victimizing the Disabled (and may therefore be in violation of United States federal law). I’ll tone down the bright blue one of these days: I rather liked it, but that’s probably because it’s intense enough for me to perceive.

    As for “using a different font”, I regret to report that the choice is, quite deliberately, unspecified in the code. The site will render in your browser’s default font. Can people really be exasperated about an “ugly” website that renders in a font they chose? And remember the principle enunciated so memorably by the Canadian power trio Rush: “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” (My faves are Georgia, Trebuchet, and much-maligned Arial.)

    Concerning the crowdedness of the menu bar–point taken; I regard my site as a destination rather than a waypoint, which may be a failing of character. But feeling the need to visit all my blogrolled sites just because they’re there certainly is such a failing. Choose randomly from the more tantalizing categories: you can’t go wrong. It’s a buffet, not a pizza.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.