Real Layouts and Qualification for Opinions
[Site Updates]
Before I start the actual post, which will be quite long winded, I’ll quickly notify you of some updates.
First, I have a new linkware layout up, and second I’ve been thinking about an opinion article about reviewing web logs (aka blogs). I know this is widely frowned upon, yet I’m not quite clear why. I’d be grateful if you could tell me your opinion on the topic. Think of it a helping hand in a research. 
. Third, I’ve added some restrictions to my Copyright Notice
[/Site Updates]
[The Wonders of E-Drama aka the 'Real' Blog Content]
I’ve been following a rather ridiculous e-drama these days (well ok: yesterday), which seems to have finished already (unfortunately 
– hey! who doesn’t like them?). Contrary to what you may think, my problem is not really the lack of oportunity for my oh-so-valuable feedback, but rather the conclusion that seems to have marked this drama.
Conclusion 1: To be or not be … a layout.
Instigator 1: No images = no layout
Instigator 2: Text layouts can’t be “pulled off”
Insulted webmasters: Accessibility all the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
Instigator 1 is 100% wrong, of course. A layout refers to the way information is displayed on a site/page/paper/etc. Therefore, even if I only have a html head and body tags, with random text typed inside the body, I DO still have a layout. Granted, it is not a very interesting one, but it IS one nonetheless.
Instigator 2 is also wrong. He claims that “nobody can pull off a text layout”. Has he actually SEEN every single text layout created? Not to mention those that are YET to be created? AS a side note, I’m also guilty of preferring the layouts using decorative images to the ones using pure CSS, nevertheless I believe that Becky’s current layout is a very good example of a “well pulled off text layout”.Flamed Webmasters: Accessibility seems to be all the hype these days. I am most definitely NOT condemning anyone for making their sites 100% accessible, on the contrary: it’s all quite admirable. This doesn’t mean, though that once in a while you couldn’t try using some small images.
Conclusion 2: Who are you to judge me?
Instigator: My site is so much more interesting and better looking than yours, that you can’t afford to argue with me.
Webmaster: Your site is so yesterday’s news.
Like I said in my Taking Up Reviewing article, you don’t really need to have any kind of ability in order to be able to have an opinion on something. Sure, it helps if you DO know how to accomplish that something, so you can provide a more constructive form of criticism, but ultimately it all comes down to (no pun intended) whether you like or dislike a certain something.
While I agree that the instigator’s site can’t compare to the webmaster’s, it truly is a petty comeback to tell someone that “you’re one to talk”. I know I’m reviewing lots of people with wonderful layouts, displaying skills I can only hope to achieve in a rather distant future. Nevertheless I’m fully entitled to have an opinion on their work. They uploaded their sites on the web, for visitors to see and admire, however no one can achieve a 100% visitor-proof layout.
Therefore PLEASE: if you’re going to prove your superior whatnot, try something other than “your not qualified to criticize, because… “. He/she is qualified. Of course, the instigator ignored the webmaster’s comment policy (make the comment relevant to the entry), repeatedly so… thus making a fool of herself (as well as himself). But the fact remains: E-Dramas are fun to watch, but incredibly stupid to take part in…. Of course, this begs the question of what I am doing here now…
Kimmie
January 26th, 2007
Oh website reviewing. I’ve stopped reviewing other websites because I no longer hold mine to the standards of other people. It’s better that way.
Vera
January 26th, 2007
No more submitting either? :razz:
Kat
January 27th, 2007
Hm, well I like simple layouts because I prefer to read than to look. And I have a pure text layout because… I’m lazy and busy :cute: I’ll probably just jazz it up a little when it’s summer vacation (March here). For now though it’s completely functional for me so I’ll leave it as it is
mile:
Jordie
January 27th, 2007
To say you don’t like a webmaster’s layout is one thing, something which anyone is able to do — but to come barging in assuming to know all there is to know about designing websites (when your use of IFrames, crappy layouts, blinking images, etc. make it quite clear you don’t know the first thing) will only prompt other people to question your right to criticise. They’re not saying other people don’t have any grounds whatsoever, they’re criticising people who parade their piss-poor website as the epitome of web design.
Vera
January 27th, 2007
@Kat: I like your layout too. I’m not saying to change it asap – but just plain accessible layouts will not appeal to the general public. Some eye candy can’t hurt
@Jordie: I find it truly deplorable the way Mallory insulted Kat, but this doesn’t change the fact that she does have the right to have said opinion. Granted, she could’ve expressed herself more politely. I don’t really find her site THAT bad. I’ve seen lots of sites much worse than hers. This is not to say that I actually LIKE her site (doll sites ‘scare’ me
).
Jordie
January 27th, 2007
No one’s taking away her right to an opinion, but this isn’t the same thing as being qualified to make a judgement on the design of someone else’s website when your own is so bad, and breaks so many of the rules generally accepted by professional Web design circles (no splash pages, for starters). It would be like going up to a pilot with 20 years of experience and telling them how to do their job when you’ve never been to flight school yourself. The First Amendment says I can say that, though most people obey their common sense and don’t lecture someone who knows more than they do.
Vera
January 27th, 2007
I understand where you come from, and I really and truly understand your and Kat’s (as well as Jenny and Amber’s) feelings. Just look at this review. The second reviewer told me she disliked my layout because it looked so incredibly easy to make, and yet I spent a couple of days customizing the coding for wordpress. The reviewer’s layout on the other hand consisted a huge image of some J-POP star with some text brushes slapped on it and a never ending text column. I was of course livid! But, even if I hadn’t specifically asked her opinion, she could’ve still been entitled to tell me what she said. I mean, had she stumbled upon my site and had she been interested in doing that.
In the end, I believe that the only thing we can accuse Mallory of, is rudeness (insult plus disregard of comment policy). I know this is sad, but that’s just how things work. We upload a site on the web, so then we have to deal with the fact that some misguided egocentric teenager will feel the need to parade their superior whatnot to us.
As for your example, I think that going a bit far. She didn’t exactly suggest anything (or well nothing worth remembering). She just plain insulted the webmasters.
Jordie
January 27th, 2007
Just to clarify, I’m not trying to pick a fight.
I was just caught a bit off guard by your comment about how Mallory is qualified to criticise other webmasters when I think she isn’t. Come on, IFrames? That doesn’t necessarily infringe on her right to an opinion. When I reviewed websites for Jem and I encountered one owned by someone who knew more about Web design than I did, I would still try to offer constructive criticism, but only within the boundaries of my own knowledge. I’d try to help them build on their site by what I could see and not by what I thought I knew. Mallory, on the other hand, left some comment on Kat’s website about how the “background image” on the quotes overlapped with the text, whereas anyone with a smattering of knowledge of Web design could tell it’s a 10px border-left. Or maybe I’m just a geek.
Vera
January 27th, 2007
Oh yes, I read that too and wasn\’t particularly sure what image she meant with the quote… but I understood that it was in IE and Kat had fixed it already; so I forgot about that comment sorry. Yes, you\’re right, that was a prime example of utter ignorance
\’quote box\’ indeed.
P.S. It never seemed to me as if you were picking a fight. I just enjoy (intelligent) debates
Brenda
January 28th, 2007
The world of website reviewing is just so full of drama. Which is why I pulled my site off yoursite.nu – where most of the drama seems to come from.
Reviewing web logs? Well, I must say that although reviewing website content and website design can be considered part of a review, I don’t quite see the point in actually reviewing the content of weblogs.
After all, weblogs are supposed to reflect the writer’s thoughts and perhaps, reiterate what has gone through the writer’s life that day. Everyone has their individual writing style which reflects them, as well as their character. So, some writers might take any critique towards their blog entries as an insult towards them. Additionally, weblogs provide the medium for pouring out emotions and or a stomping ground for the angry blogger.
I don’t know. Just my thoughts.
I’ve had people telling me that “my entries are too long and too boring and it turned her off” on YS.nu before but all I could say to that was, “Hey, but that’s my writing style and it reflects me.”.
Vera
January 28th, 2007
:cute: Yes, as far as I know that’s the general idea I’ve seen with blog reviews. Yes, most people are turned off by long portions of text, be they blogs or something else. It’s the prospect of reading that scares them
Megori
January 28th, 2007
Though this may be random and completely off topic from your article, I’d like to point out to you that your link to Faltered Heart Reviews, in your review page, is wrong. Rather than reviews.frozen-heart.net the URL should be reviews.frozen.rain.net just wanted to let you know.
Vera
January 29th, 2007
Sorry, I fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out.
Mary-Ann
January 29th, 2007
Hm, I like large amounts of text. And at the same time, I do admit they scare. But I’m all in for long blogs, because it gives me the impression that the writer has much to say and the content usually expressed in blogs is interesting for me.
I quite agree that the variety of styles makes reviewing a little difficult. People have completely different tastes, so I reckon an objective judgement is almost impossible here, whereas it is a little more likely in the case of other sorts of web pages.
Nan
February 1st, 2007
“Instigator 1: No images = no layout” – I see this all of the time too and I think it’s bull… A newspaper has a certain layout whether or not there is images to support the articles.
I love your new linkware layout. It’s the best IMHO!
Vera
February 2nd, 2007
:cute: Thanks. I find it a bit bland though… and I still don’t have any inspiration for a new layout of my own
Claudia
February 3rd, 2007
Very nice layout you did
I submitted a former website to be reviewed by some people but I stopped that because I hated the way they did it. They judged based on their personal opinion like “I don’t like green, so your layout s****” instead of “the shades of green are matching quite good” or “maybe you should think about giving it a wider range of colours” …
Vera
February 4th, 2007
Yes, that’s a rather useless review. Not taking personal opinions into account is one of the greatest challenges when it comes to being a good web site reviewer.
Thank you for the compliment.
Joana
February 5th, 2007
First off, I just want to say that I love these smilies :cute: They’re so very cute.
I am so tired of net drama, seriously it seems every time I turn around there is someone else mothing off. While I respect a person’s right to express their views I think it should be done in a courteous manner. I agree with the sentiments expressed by Jordie yet I think that is too narrow of a view. That view suggests that the only person qualified to give their opinion is an “expert”. This begs the question of what is an expert, of course. While we would all like the comments and criticisms given to us to be dispensed by those we judge to be our peers or superiors I feel that is an unreasonable expectation. It does not take an expert to tell you that the colors of your site are blinding, for example, or that your site is filled with irksome net-lingo. Any layman can do that, and indeed anyone will tell you these things because it is how they feel and they are welcome to express their sentiments.
This comment is turning out rather long-winded so I’ll just wrap it up by stating that I don’t really see the need for a blog review site. As one person mentioned, a blog is the vehicle by which people express themselves. It can be the outlet for their greif, pain, and anger or it could be the trumpet by which they blast their joy. how can you critique that without insulting the person behind it? If you choose to pursue this I wish you luck in finding a balance between helpful and blunt. I truly think that those are dangerous waters you’re treading. Then again, if the person is asking for critique then I suppose they really shouldn’t be too offended if what is said is not to their liking. Easier said then done though.
mile:
Vera
February 5th, 2007
I don’t want to review blogs
mile: mostly because no one would submit their sites to me. I was thinking on writing an article on why people are so against such things, and what could possibly be improved on this.
That is the gist of what I wanted to say. You don’t need to be an expert – far from it – in order to give an opinion. You DO however need to be courteous.
Starlet
February 5th, 2007
For me theres nothing lamer than the snobs who think they own the internet because they validate, never have I seen such a close-minded (on that subject, of course) group of people! :fist:
Vera
February 6th, 2007
Well validation has its merits, unfortunately it is not enough. Then again, I’ve met enough people who started rattling to me because OMG you have 3 validation errors
… oh yes, criminal offense.