On 14 October 2013 21:48, vernon adams <v...@newtypography.co.uk> wrote: > This all could be an interesting discussion, except I read Tom's article > not as part of any discussion, but as a piece of Online Advertising for > the WebInk product.
Its a nice theory, but the word 'webink' is nowhere to be found on http://www.thomasphinney.com/2013/10/free-fonts-revealed-and-reviled/ > Tom is just saying "hey, use our stuff. Your stupid if you use that free > stuff." No, he's not. > I think that sort of journo-advertising would be better effective by > showing people why the WebInk product is really good, what sets it > apart positively from other webfont services, and ultimately why its target > users should invest in it. Dissing other people's more poular output never > looks good, it 'turns on' a few people, but 'turns off' a lot more. It's bad > branding 101. He who casts the first stone bro ;)
