That probably means I'll never win another game.
Not that I win many now...
--
Bob
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Roberts
> Sent: 27 March 2007 16:19
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re:
Bob W wrote:
>here's one of my all-time favourite sucky sites:
>http://www.guide-to-squash.org/pages/totw/totw.html
>
>It gets almost everything wrong in every way. Unfortunately it's also
>quite useful, if you like squash.
Thanks againBob. I nominated the site and it's now on
www.webpagesthatsu
>
> From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I was just using his "Does my web site suck" list in class today:
> http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/does-my-web-site-suck/does-my-web-site-suck-checklist-part-one.html
"Restricted Access: your attempt to access this URL has been logged"
You have to l
rk Roberts
>> Sent: 26 March 2007 22:40
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: OT: Web site review
>>
>> P. J. Alling wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Web pages that suck taught good web design by showing bad
>>>
>> design. It&#x
Bob W wrote:
>here's one of my all-time favourite sucky sites:
>http://www.guide-to-squash.org/pages/totw/totw.html
>
>It gets almost everything wrong in every way. Unfortunately it's also
>quite useful, if you like squash.
Isn't that the worst? When there's a site with awful design but great
co
I was gong to get excited, I though you were talking about Acorn, Zucchini,
Hubbard, Patty-pan...
Tom C.
>From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'"
>Subject: RE: OT: Web si
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Roberts
> Sent: 26 March 2007 22:40
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: OT: Web site review
>
> P. J. Alling wrote:
>
> >Web pages that suck taught good web design by showing bad
> design. It's
> >an ou
In a message dated 3/26/2007 2:57:49 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
here's one of my all-time favourite sucky sites:
http://www.guide-to-squash.org/pages/totw/totw.html
It gets almost everything wrong in every way. Unfortunately it's also
quite useful, if you like squa
P. J. Alling wrote:
>Web pages that suck taught good web design by showing bad design. It's
>an outgrowth of a web site:
>http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/
>This is a case where you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover.
Very true. This book has actually been used quite a bit as a textbook
for c
Web pages that suck taught good web design by showing bad design. It's
an outgrowth of a web site:
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/
This is a case where you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover.
keith_w wrote:
> Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> BTW Nick, there's only one thing wrong with that picture
In a message dated 3/26/2007 9:16:39 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that the name of the webpage is appropriate. It sure sucks,
IMNSHO. Reminds me of the guy you seen on TV with the dollar signs
pasted all over him. But I believe it was PT Barnum who said, "You
; From: "keith_w"
> Subject: Re: OT: Web site review
>
>
>>> http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/sonof/
>>
>> I'd never buy that sucky book, merely from looking at the poorly
>> designed cover!
>> The author must have approved that messy layout,
Something to what Mark says there. My website does show my photo, but
the site is more of a vanity than an sales tool. In fact, I have only
shot one job this year (engagement photos) and have turned down the
wedding. But my disability makes me unsure that I can complete a job
satisfactorily. If
- Original Message -
From: "keith_w"
Subject: Re: OT: Web site review
>
>> http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/sonof/
>
>
> I'd never buy that sucky book, merely from looking at the poorly
> designed cover!
> The author must have approved tha
well, everyone else has already commented on the technical side, so
there is nothing that I could say to help you there. However, I too
hate 'fancy' sites that hijack your computar etc... and no I do not
think your site to be too spartan. Basic yes, but if were to make a
few changes mentioned he
onday, March 26, 2007 4:32 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Web site review
Oh...I missed the DOF issue. If you do keep your photo out there,
have one that shows a gritty hardened photojournalist (or at least
something "macho" looking...whatever that means). Your photo
Mark Roberts wrote:
> BTW Nick, there's only one thing wrong with that picture of you on the
> web site: It's a picture of *you& ;-) You should put up your best-ever
> wedding shot (that you can get permission to use) on your index page.
>
> Go all out showing off your best work, with prominent
Oh...I missed the DOF issue. If you do keep your photo out there,
have one that shows a gritty hardened photojournalist (or at least
something "macho" looking...whatever that means). Your photo is how I
would take one of a bride :-D
Bong
On 3/26/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW
>
> From:
> "Nick Wright"
> I threw up a simple Web site, and I was wondering if you all would
> tell me what you thought of it. Professionally-speaking.
>
> I hate fancy flashy sites. So mine probably appears a bit spartan. But
> I would like to know what you all think. Thanks a lot.
>
> The addy
BTW Nick, there's only one thing wrong with that picture of you on the
web site: It's a picture of *you& ;-) You should put up your best-ever
wedding shot (that you can get permission to use) on your index page.
Go all out showing off your best work, with prominent links (use
thumbnail shots) t
On 3/25/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In most web sites it's a bit annoying to have links labeled "click
> here". A description or thumbnail with the link embedded is a much
> better practice. It looks more professional as well.
Hi Nick,
I'm Filipino...we're not good at being "h
Nick Wright wrote:
>I threw up a simple Web site, and I was wondering if you all would
>tell me what you thought of it. Professionally-speaking.
>
>I hate fancy flashy sites. So mine probably appears a bit spartan. But
>I would like to know what you all think. Thanks a lot.
>
>The addy is:
>http:/
Hi Nick
The site is a bit spartan but there's nothing wrong with that if you want to
keep things simple.
A couple of suggestions:
I think the pages would look better if there was more white space between the
images and the text. There are several ways of doing this but if you're not
using st
In most web sites it's a bit annoying to have links labeled "click
here". A description or thumbnail with the link embedded is a much
better practice. It looks more professional as well.
Nick Wright wrote:
> I threw up a simple Web site, and I was wondering if you all would
> tell me what you
I threw up a simple Web site, and I was wondering if you all would
tell me what you thought of it. Professionally-speaking.
I hate fancy flashy sites. So mine probably appears a bit spartan. But
I would like to know what you all think. Thanks a lot.
The addy is:
http://www.phojonick.com/
--
~Ni
25 matches
Mail list logo
