Actually you had the content. We both know you're a very fine artist, and you had plenty of stuff to put together into a site even from the off. You just refused to tie it down to a site, worrying constantly over the design, coming up with something nice... then throwing it out for no reason, until it just never got done.
... I had content? Better to PM me with more just in case we lose track with the whole "Nini's aborted website" idea. No matter, I don't code.
tesandco posted:
Breaking up Purple has always been a bit hard to do. If you want me to go back to the Revision 2-8 schema where its broken by bright green and turquoise I can, but that seemed even worse. Likewise the attempts to add some colour to the Main Logo in Revision 9 looked ghastly and out of place. In terms of now, the image previews are designed to add some colour (and with the homepage, its still under development as mentioned on there). I have tried a few times to mix in some logos of stations and such to the background too to add some more variety, but I could never come up with something I was happy with.
Blame the fact you won't ask for help, it's clear you can't design for beans and rarely like anyone else's efforts. I know I asked and got refused.
tesandco posted:
And you still didnt answer what's wrong with Internet Explorer, no?
No.... I'm not saying because... um, because it was a cache thing. Yeah. Stupid rabbit.
Em what's with the whole Revsion 20zillion rubbish? That seems to be something that's on-going with your site while every other site just calls it updates?
You seem to be more caught up on announcing and publishing the "Revisions 5x4g6za" than anything else. Maybe it's just me.
Wow, there's an awful lot of 'all the other sites do this, so so should you' going round lately. Is it that time of the month or something? Funnily, I haven't seen anyone clamouring for me to plonk the site's logo all over the video clips, which is 'something that most others do too' (understandably with the ebay lot out there now). Anyway, basically, the 'revision xxx' thing is another of those things that's just always been there, and stays around as a guide so people have some idea of the style of the next update. Revision 1 of the website never had it, but when Revision 2 came along it was such a drastic update I included 'Revision 2' to indicate it as a total relaunch.
Ever since then, its been kept as a general indicator of the size of the update, in following a standard pattern. Anything with new content in is x.x. Anything with nothing new and only a minor page tweak or something, such as for christmas decorations or Worst Ad updates is x.x.x. Sometimes I just fun about with it admittedly, and put allsorts of crazy numbers in for the hell of it. When it comes to the whole non-decimal numbers, such as 2, 3, 4 etc, it always indicates a *big* update, generally with somewhere in the region of 50 files all at once, and major design changes to the site. Before such updates, there's also generally a 'big-update-break' of about 2 months, which I spend preparing all this. Indeed, Revision 13 has been the first such update without a big chunk of files, but this was explained away by the fact I have heaps of work and didn't take the usual '2 months before updating' break, having only decided about a fortnight ago that 13 would come about at the end of the birthday.
The other thing with the revision numbers, is that they were introduced back when I didn't tend to update the site as often, so you'd get a few months gap before jumping from one big update to the next. Its become a little less relevent as the site has been more frequently updated, but still works. Perhaps later in the year when I get my rapid content deployment system coded, I might finally drop them, but we'll see.
Heh, you can blame me for the wave of anti-sentiment towards your site.. it's totally valid though regardless of the tech behind it or the "I'm going/staying my way, go smurf yourself" response you're providing.
Everyone has generally moved on from basic looking sites which look like no thought has been put into it. OK, sure, you went and coded up a storm of excellence but it looks like 10 years have passed and to those who ain't up on the tech side or even care what means of content managment you use, it looks like a 12 year old's first crack at a site. Content's OK, presentation still matters a lot and it lacks. Never noticed the whole Version x.x thing as a terrible thing though does imply a huge change rather than something more representative of your site actually being at 3.6.5 in the whole version numbering system.
Of all the sites, and this is speaking as someone who'd like your site to be great and a excellent repository of info, yours comes low because it looks amateur. Heck, for me TV Ark for all it's content looked like garbage under it's blue, high-compression JPEGs for everything look and didn't get much respect from me because it left me feeling like they didn't know nor care how to make a good site. They changed and I consider them one of the better sites for seeing the light, I don't feel the same love for yours and that's not because I dislike you.
Gotta handle the criticism kid, this isn't your pet project for you and your pet cat or something, you're doing it for others even if you figure otherwise so listen and respond accordingly rather than flipping them the bird in your Morris Minor.
Heh, I dont mind the criticism, just so long as you dont expect me to rush out and enact major wholescale changes days after changing just because a few think I should. Did the BBC do that after introducing the dancers? (Admittedly this would be much easier if I had one of their PR guys working for me). Despite that, if you saw the message on the homepage, designwise it's still a work in progress, and I do intend to do some minor tinkering with it when I have the time, but its not going to see a total relaunch again for some time, as I simply dont have the time or inclination to do so. You're wrong about this not being a pet project though, as that's exactly what it is. It's a thing done on the side, in spare time, because I want to. Not something I devote my whole life to running, or because I feel I *owe* the public some service. :s
I don't expect a huge returf of the place now, who does? It's a one-rabbit jobby which just looks like it needs a new lick of paint just so it doesn't look like something that was archived a decade ago. Pet projects, odd beasties, they're still in need to respond to the visitor's opinion if they're providing a service which yours is. Not to bend totally to their whim but to listen and look at it from a visitor's point of view and adjust it. Terrible when you're so close to something, you barely see it's flaws... not saying you're too close though, longear, passing comment.
I dunno, I'm just seeing it as wanting the best of your site rather than just ruthlessly taking it apart because it's creator happens to be... the way he is.
I dunno, I'm just seeing it as wanting the best of your site rather than just ruthlessly taking it apart because it's creator happens to be... the way he is.
Gah, I so want to know what was on the end of that sentence before the edit you made to the post. Mind I'm not too close that I dont see the design has critical flaws, which is why I keep tinkering with it. I'll do some more changes over the coming weeks, but for now at least I've toned down the bright purple quota somewhat (yes, I know its only a 2-minute job for now). The only reason it got turned up in this update was because the last design where I'd tried toning it down ended up coming out all pink instead. <.<
I still say you need to get your ass on IM more again. You'd have gotten a look in on the new look when it first got started under design, and could have ripped it apart and had it created totally differently much earlier if you had been.
Gah, I so want to know what was on the end of that sentence before the edit you made to the post.
I'll be taking that to the grave, ta muchly.
tesandco posted:
I'll do some more changes over the coming weeks, but for now at least I've toned down the bright purple quota somewhat (yes, I know its only a 2-minute job for now). The only reason it got turned up in this update was because the last design where I'd tried toning it down ended up coming out all pink instead.
It's brown now.
tesandco posted:
I still say you need to get your ass on IM more again.
Maybe so but the IM sabbatical conintues unfettered though even with the perks of bad layout and design to go and comment upon... PM me like I said.
Mind I'm not too close that I dont see the design has critical flaws, which is why I keep tinkering with it. I'll do some more changes over the coming weeks, but for now at least I've toned down the bright purple quota somewhat (yes, I know its only a 2-minute job for now). The only reason it got turned up in this update was because the last design where I'd tried toning it down ended up coming out all pink instead. <.<
