web-goddess

Category: Meta

  • Children’s UX

    Jakob Nielsen has a new report on website usability for kids. Since I myself run a site geared towards children, I read it with some interest. Unfortunately it confirmed my worst fears. Kids want bells and whistles. Kids don’t like to read. Kids don’t get hierarchical navigation. All of which means my site is one big usability nightmare for them. Honestly, though, I sorta knew that would be the case when I designed it. I had to think about the adults that would visit the site too, though. I also wanted to make it clear that my site was about information, not pure entertainment. I mean, compare my site to the official one. That’s the debate right there. The official one is very flashy and whizzy and noisy, yet it’s also incredibly difficult to track down specific information about Dahl or his books. My site, on the other hand, is pretty much transparent about where everything is located. Which is better? Personally, I think challenging kids is more important than pandering to them. I’m not talking about making things deliberately difficult, but I’m not talking about making them totally simple either. Kids are gonna need to learn how to research someday. Why should I hand them everything on a silver platter? I want them to think and read and figure things out. I refuse to dumb down my site because little Johnny’s too impatient to click on the “Timeline” to find out Dahl’s birthday. This is where I think the flaw is in Nielsen’s study. Was he studying kids using websites for fun, or kids using websites for a purpose? Which type of site do you prefer?

    I think I might make a survey at my site to find out what the visitors think. Not that that will make me change anything, but I might as well know if I’m pissing them off.

  • Whoops

    In case you’re wondering, the clock on my server is all messed up, which is why so many posts are appearing on the front page. I’ve put in a support request to fix it.

  • New Poll

    It’s another “favorite food” topic. When you’re at the big game, what’s your snack of choice?

  • Ethical considerations

    Matt linked to an interesting article about the ethics of posting “found” material on the Internet. I’ve been puzzling over a somewhat-related issue lately myself. Does anyone know anything about public artwork and whether it can be reproduced online? There are a number of murals in Newtown (where I live) that have caught my attention. Most seem to have been done by random graffiti artists, but a few seem to be attached (literally and metaphorically) to businesses. My first impulse was to post some pictures of these at my site, which has turned into a full-blown “Why don’t I start up a Mirror Project-type site for everyone to post these?” idea. I’m worried that there might be copyright issues involved, though. But that can’t be the case when the artwork’s already been put out there in the public domain, can it? What if I take a picture of myself and the mural just happens to be in the background? Is that acceptable? As long as I’m not making money off it, I would assume that such a website could only be seen as promotional, encouraging people to visit the murals shown and to be on the lookout for public art in their own hometowns. Or is this just a silly idea? All I know is, if you saw the big map of Africa on the side of Newtown’s North African Eatery, you’d see what I mean. Someone worked hard on that. This stuff deserves to be noticed.

  • Ugh, spammers.

    I hate spammers. I especially hate the ones that send you messages that say, “Hey, I visited your site and noticed you’re not listed on some search engines…” They piss me off.

    • Okay, first off, the spammer is assuming that I want my site listed on 50,000 random crappy search engines. Which I don’t. Based on my server logs, 90% of people come though via Google or Yahoo anyway, and I’m already listed there.
    • Why add the bit about visiting my site? In the case of Purple Weasels.org, I think it’s pretty clear that the site is not for the general public. It’s an online community for a very specific group of people. It’s obvious that it shouldn’t be submitted to lots of search engines. Therefore, the spammer is either stupid or dishonest.
    • Why must they send huge bloated HTML-formatted e-mails? Am I the only one that uses PINE to read my mail these days?

    I’m just annoyed because this particular spammer has hit all three of my personal sites and has repeatedly ignored my requests to be removed from their mailing list. Anybody feel like engaging in a little Google bombing with me? Just throw up a link like this – “evil spamming assholes” – on your site. I thank you.

  • Poll

    New Poll! What’s your favorite Easter taste treat? (Warning: this poll is rather U.S.-centric, since I never really figured out what Brits eat for Easter.)

  • Ew.

    Please note: This is not a Goonie fetishists site. I don’t care if you have dreams about Kerri Green’s underpants. If you leave disgusting comments here, they will be deleted. So don’t bother anymore, okay?

  • Poll

    New Poll: In honor of the group therapy session Brigita and I are having, please indicate your position in your junior high social caste system. (For you non-Americans, we’re talking about ages 13-15.)

  • Meh.

    I haven’t been in a very bloggy mood lately. I say that knowing that I’ll probably end up posting fourteen times tonight.

  • Lurkers say hi!

    I’ve been thinking about that “audience” thing I said below. You know, in my mind I think of the audience of this site just being the folks that leave comments. But I myself visit lots of sites where I just lurk and never post anything. So I wonder – do I have many lurkers? If you’re a regular-ish reader and you rarely (or never) comment, please do me a favor and say hello. You don’t have to come up with anything witty; just let me know that you’re out there. (I’m suddenly paralyzed by the thought that there aren’t any lurkers, and this is just going to be embarrassing.)