Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Steven Clark wrote: I think you may have the wrong end of the stick on what the initial post was about. Someone wanted to point out that a site was badly made and another suggested the sending of this document. All I am suggesting is that in that circumstance it is neither professional nor in the best interest of one's cause to be abusive. The posting it was raised in was called: Re: [WSG] What can you say to a site like this? It wasn't a document I wandered across and just thought yuk, obviously. Enough said. Steven Clark Norty Pig Web Development http://www.nortypig.com http://www.blog.nortypig.com _ Click here for the latest chart ringtones: http://ringtones.com.au/ninemsn/control?page=/ninemsn/main.jsp ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** So you are the one in error. In the future if you are going to start a debate type topic make sure to make your point clear. Seeing as you have created it make sure to read through all the responses and consider what people have said. Debates on etiquette are probably not particularly relevant anyway, I would advise against starting such topics. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Hi all, If you have any specific concerns please forward them to info@webboy.net or [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'll just mention that you can't write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as it's a closed list and you'll be rejected posting to it unless you are subscribed. Sorry Mark :( I am working on another form of communication for list admin or core group contact to take some pressure off info@webboy.net which is also our business address. I'll let you know when I come up with something. P ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Stanton Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 9:20 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm? Hi All The WSG Core group are with you guys 100% here. No foul language, abuse, negativity or other offensive behaviour will be tolerated on the list. We do our best to keep an eye on things and deal with in appropriate behaviour by contacting those concerned directly. If you have any specific concerns please forward them to info@webboy.net or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just one other thing I like to point out - the page in question has been online for a lot longer than the WSG list and, to the best of my knowledge, it was not written by a list member. However posting the link to the list was probably not the best idea. -- Mark Stanton Gruden Pty Ltd http://www.gruden.com ** If you look at night owl's home page, you'll find that this is intended as a vent my spleen page. If you take it in that spirit (and who amongst us hasn't caste this particular stone?), it remains a precise, accurate dissection of the problems with page design and construction. And, as she says she's never identified any particular page as moronic. Rather, she's describing an obtuse mind set which fails to understand the potential of the web. Personally, I hope she finds time to write the Windows rant. drew ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
I think you may have the wrong end of the stick on what the initial post was about. Someone wanted to point out that a site was badly made and another suggested the sending of this document. All I am suggesting is that in that circumstance it is neither professional nor in the best interest of one's cause to be abusive. The posting it was raised in was called: Re: [WSG] What can you say to a site like this? It wasn't a document I wandered across and just thought yuk, obviously. Enough said. Steven Clark Norty Pig Web Development http://www.nortypig.com http://www.blog.nortypig.com _ Click here for the latest chart ringtones: http://ringtones.com.au/ninemsn/control?page=/ninemsn/main.jsp ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Steven, I agree with you. The message about web standards is important, but pages like the one linked to only serves to aggravate and insult. Companies or individuals responsible for managing sites that are poorly constructed do not need to be treated in this manner. A more friendly, educational approach without the condescending tone and insulting language would work a lot better. You catch more bees with honey and all that jazz. Ntalie On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 01:33:26 +, Steven Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNIP http://members.optusnet.com.au/~night.owl/morons.html As far as the standards movement goes I actually think that such offensive behaviour would have to be more detrimental to the cause than good, closing minds and eyes to reason with an abusive introduction. Honestly if someone sent you a link saying you're a moron would you think its more valid than any other spam? ... If we want to be seen as professionals then a certain level of professionalism should apply, I'm sure that being inclusive, educational and helpful would be more to the spirit of a universal web than throwing stones. ... -- Website Designer/Developer www.nataliebuxton.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Steven Clark wrote: I only mention it because it was posted with next to no comment and its really an important issue. It's quite possible that I either missed the email, deleted it, or it was sent before I registered with this list. I had wondered why the moderator had to send an email reminding us of our choice of language and I thought some of the statements in that web page were offensive and inappropriate. Now I think I know what that email had been referring to. If I had seen that message, I would have responded myself. Thanks for pointing this out, Steven. _ Charles Martin http://www.webcudgel.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Steven Clark wrote: I've been reading my digests after a small holiday and I came across this link posted a few days ago for moronic designers to be sent. Is this really a good idea? Of course it's not. It says a lot about the intellectual level and elitist head firmly up my recharge socket attitude of the page's author. And yes, it's detrimental, as the aggressive, offensive language only helps to obscure the actual information (in the same vein that, say, extremist religious fanaticism isn't about the actual religion, but about why my god(s) is/are better than yours). Maybe night owl needs to get a few emails about proper etiquette and maybe even the basics of human interaction (if you start an argument by calling somebody a moron, don't expect them to listen to you) to get a taste of his own medicine... -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Hi All The WSG Core group are with you guys 100% here. No foul language, abuse, negativity or other offensive behaviour will be tolerated on the list. We do our best to keep an eye on things and deal with in appropriate behaviour by contacting those concerned directly. If you have any specific concerns please forward them to info@webboy.net or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just one other thing I like to point out - the page in question has been online for a lot longer than the WSG list and, to the best of my knowledge, it was not written by a list member. However posting the link to the list was probably not the best idea. -- Mark Stanton Gruden Pty Ltd http://www.gruden.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
I never meant to actually complain about anyone on the list or the list itself, I apologise to anyone I've offended who may think I'm pointing at them. I simply meant to point in the direction of what I see as a bad practise of pushing the right wheelbarrow the wrong way. I know the companies I've had anything to do with move slowly and cautiously and can be scared away quite easily with new ideas. Only after a year to two years am I getting a bit of response back indicating they've actually changed their ways, and the same for local web design firms. But trying to bully them into change isn't the way to get them to do anything. They make money already and don't need me. They tend to slowly absorb what I say and echo it back months later as their own after they've privately done some homework. But no I wasn't complaining about list members or posts in themselves, sorry. Its good to have a wide variety of ideas in any forum environment to maintain valid and balanced views. God help us all if we all thought like me, for instance. Steven Clark Norty Pig Web Development http://www.nortypig.com http://www.blog.nortypig.com _ Searching for that dream home? Try http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au for all your property needs. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
Steven Clark wrote: I've been reading my digests after a small holiday and I came across this link posted a few days ago for moronic designers to be sent. Is this really a good idea? http://members.optusnet.com.au/~night.owl/morons.html I mean I'm pro web standards etc and in all honestly I'd read the first bit and see idiot and moron and it'd hit the bin, so the writer even lost me. Effective design principles would dictate that the whole point of the page is to get the information to the target audience, but really does it? Its offensively written, rude, long and even a bit angry As far as the standards movement goes I actually think that such offensive behaviour would have to be more detrimental to the cause than good, closing minds and eyes to reason with an abusive introduction. Honestly if someone sent you a link saying you're a moron would you think its more valid than any other spam? I only mention it because it was posted with next to no comment and its really an important issue. If we want to be seen as professionals then a certain level of professionalism should apply, I'm sure that being inclusive, educational and helpful would be more to the spirit of a universal web than throwing stones. But that's only my opinion I suppose, and no more valid than that beyond the link. Food for thought. Steven Clark Norty Pig Web Development http://www.nortypig.com http://www.blog.nortypig.com _ SEEK: Now with over 60,000 dream jobs! Click here: http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** If that is how the author wanted to write the document they have a right to do so. Its not like its automatically endorsed by the WSG or as it it sets some kind of precedent. I feel that its fairly obvious that the document is intended to capture peoples interest by being entertaining, while you may not find it funny i am surprised that you did not see this intent. In some ways while I don't think its the best read it is a refreshing change. A lot of web design publications have become fairly stale in an attempt to perhaps over professionalize them. Etc, Im sure you get the idea. Anyway thats just how I feel about this. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Is sending abusive spam doing standards good or harm?
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~night.owl/morons.html Effective design principles would dictate that the whole point of the page is to get the information to the target audience, but really does it? Its offensively written, rude, long and even a bit angry I've seen this page before and had a good laugh at it - personally I see it more as someone having a major vent about the web design habits which drive them crazy. Obviously it's rude - I seriously doubt it was written as a serious attempt to change anybody's ways. Your point is good though - anyone seriously expecting results would be crazy to take such an approach. -- --- http://cheshrkat.blogspot.com/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
