copycat trends

at 16:51 on 16 November 2006, uggh wrote:

"with there way too strict validating policies like CSS Beauty or CSS Mania"

really? i'm not quite sure the author understands why "Web standards are a big blessing" (as she puts it) if she's makes this comment. (sounds gripy cause she can't get her own site up to standards imo)

"Follow Wanda as she cleans up your horrible uninspiring looks in 7 steps"

does she even mention "looks" anywhere in the article?

agreed on some points (tagclouds, ... well, mainly just tagclouds), but the rest seem pretty subjective. personally i find datestamps pretty useful, i.e. if i want the most recent post on a certain technology, they come in quite handy. stop showing comment authors? "accidental tourist coming to your site is not interested in the persons behind these comments" ... ? says who?

pretty broad generalized assumption, if you ask me. not that anyone is, but ...

at 16:53 on 16 November 2006, uggh wrote:

*sounds gripy cause she can't get her own site up to standards imo

okay, i take that back, she only has one alt tag missing, but still, i don't understand the "too strict" comment she makes.

at 19:00 on 16 November 2006, unstructure wrote:

It sounds like someone who just likes to gripe about something just cause they are bored. My girlfriend does this about clothing all the time, about the stupid UGG boots other girls are wearing or some weird plastic shoes, or chunky girls wearing low rider jeans.

I actually disagree with pretty much everything she gave an opinion about ... although tag clouds are very useless.

at 19:26 on 16 November 2006, Joshua Kendall wrote:

Normally I wouldn't do this, but since she doesn't allow comments. I offer my opinion on my blog (admins feel free to delete this if you wish).

- My Opinion

Oh, and I allow comments. :)

at 20:22 on 16 November 2006, Seth Aldridge wrote:

Standards are the wave of the future. I know that not a lot of people care to use them and they complain about IE7 and other browsers but if you follow the standards set in place you'll have a lot less headache in trying to debug your site. I am working on learning all the standards I can and in just a few short weeks it has changed the way I approach designing for the web.

I think she has the right to complain about what she doesn't like, but all that is going to do is put you further behind the curve. There is a good chance that Web Standards are not going to slow down for the people that put them off for so long.

at 22:01 on 16 November 2006, Justin Kilcher wrote:

While I agree with the excessive tagging I think the majority of these steps are rather subjective. I personally love being able to openly comment on blogs I come across if I read something interesting and being able to see the date its been posted. I also dont see how any of these things would classify a website as "uninspiring". I think this article would have been much more interesting if it dealt with design issues surrounding copycat css sites instead of stock features from common CMS's.

at 12:00 on 17 November 2006, Peter Hall wrote:

Don't show comment authors? What good is that going to do? If comment writers know their names are not going to be displayed, they'll just start signing their comments.

--

Peter Hall ;)

at 16:15 on 17 November 2006, David B. wrote:

"Do not take this article too serious. We just found out some of you do. Which probably means you are unfamilliar with the word "column" and you start interpreting this story as exact science. Which it is not off course! We are just holding up a mirror. Happy webdesigning!"

at 16:36 on 17 November 2006, Joshua Kendall wrote:

That's not what it said yesterday though. I believe sheep were mentioned.

”[...] Then your perfectly right, perfectly valid, and a perfect sheep. And your site probably mimics the crap our illustrator did put below this story.”

at 16:40 on 17 November 2006, i don\'t get it wrote:

what's the point of this article? it's poorly written with a number of typos and poor grammar. it's "not to be taken seriously," and it says almost nothing about visual design or css XHTML (as the intro, "uninspiring looks," would imply). it seems to be more about content.

personally, i think they're just trying to stir some feathers to get some hits to their site. the site was just added to cssmania.com (perhaps just submitted to there (and other sites?) as well – by the creator?) ... speculation, but, doesn't seem so unlikely

at 16:49 on 17 November 2006, i don\'t get it wrote:

"Which probably means you are unfamilliar with the word 'column'" <br />man, they're just full of assumptions over there, huh?

was the word "column" added to the post since yesterday as well?

"Do not take this article too serious[ly]. "<br />so they don't mean anything they wrote? these aren't their opinions?

at 21:26 on 17 November 2006, ReTodd wrote:

If it's a personal blog, I don't see having a flickr badge as being a problem.

Add a comment:

Keep the comment relevant, constructive and be polite.
A valid email address or URL to your site must be provided, or the comment might get deleted. Content seemed inappropriate or offensive may be edited and/or deleted. Avoid explicit language and words such as "sucks" and "ripoff". For more in-depth discussions use our forum. Email addresses are never displayed. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted - no need to use <p> or <br/>. Quotes & apostrophes are automatically converted to smart punctuation. Be careful when copying and pasting portions of entries or other comments. The following inline HTML elements may be used: <strong><em><pre><q><blockquote><code>. All other code will get removed before posting. Don't forget to close your tags.