[DWJ] websites (was What We've been doing instead of talking)
Melissa at Proffitt.com
Tue Aug 26 13:54:34 EDT 2008
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:35:26 +0100, Jennifer Rowland wrote:
>> It seems to me that websites are like much other writing in this respect:
>> if the people who write them want to communicate, it helps if they do it in
>> a language and by a means that can be easily read by a majority of the
>> people they would like to communicate with, rather than putting obstacles
>> in the way.
>And if the people who put up websites show, by using all sorts of Flash and setting five million cookies and having irritating design, that the people they want to communicate with are the ones who value style over substance... I'm happy to oblige them by staying far away. (In much the same way, really, as I responded to those Yorkie chocolate ads saying "not for girls!"- "Oh, really? What other brands do these people produce so I can help them keep my nasty female money away from their nice manly profits?" One can have some quiet fun in taking people at their word, sometimes. Like those kobolds.)
My least favorite ones are the ones that have music. I know, that's not a
visual distraction, but I listen to my own music all day long and it's a
real pain to have to root out their music file and turn it OFF.
More information about the Dwj