Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

-------------------------

Web Design | Best Beef Jerky | ecommerce articles | Follow vwebworld on Twitter

I think the entire purpose of having a Web site is so that people can see whatever it is you`re trying to get across. If the only people who ever could access a site were site developers and designers, I`m thinking the Web would have a whole lot fewer people.

As you`ve said, I`ve also noticed that people tend to be shy about critiquing Web sites because they think they`re not technical folks, don`t know all that coding stuff, or otherwise don`t have anything useful to contribute. It`s just not so.

ANYone who has a computer and uses the Web for anything can offer their commentary. If they love the site, fine. If they hate it, then maybe at least explain why. But love or hate; it`s more about "Does this Web site capture the viewer`s attention and interest?"

It`s hard to explain why a site does or doesn`t work, and that`s fine too. In a critique, it isn`t necessary to always have the explanations and words. To me, a critique is somewhat like a poll....a general consensus from like-minded people as to whether or not it works.

Building a website comes down to trial and error. Even for the best of them.


-------------------------

EventBrander.com | Custom Printed T-Shirts, Promotional Products, Lowest Prices Guaranteed

I agree, BUT if someone is making a web site for a business and is serious about the business then there SHOULD be a certain level of quality, security, aesthetics and other components. You can`t apply same standards to an e-commerce site and a web page about your dog Buddy. Amature web site relays an impression of an amature business.

I think this post that Roland began, was due to the need for more constructive criticism here at times, on Sun. And welcoming every one`s thoughts on critiques, not just web techs. That way you also can be critiqued by a buyer`s, or visitors point of view..

 

Personally, I would say that just about every visitor that a site has is a potential customer; their input is invaluable as to why they will, or won`t, pursue doing business with the site.


-------------------------

M Hall
Website Critique Community
International Society of Curmudgeons

This is a good point. yes.

At the other hand, it`s somewhat like asking customers about how to make a wheel: "What shape should it be? Oh, square -- thank you for your input, we think you`re right". I mean, there are some things about web design that there`s no need to invent or seek opinion of a bunch of people. And a typical somewhat experienced web designer would know them. And a lot of mistakes and consequently suggestions that are discussed here are quite redundant, like adding page titles, meta tags, product images etc. It`s like knowing axiomas in math - if you know them then you`re good, you can go on; if not then you`ll get all D`s and F`s no matter what, and a few of the sites discussed here are precisely grade "D" and "F".

What`s interesting about this discussion from a philosophic perspective is that there`s an undercurrent of thought about what constitutes facts, skill, knowledge, and opinion.

One of the tragic consequences of political correctness, outcome-based education, and modern-day relativism is the loss of separation between objective and subjective knowledge. In the example of getting input on the design of a wheel, the basic shape of a wheel isn`t up for discussion. The nature of a wheel, based on the definitino of the word itself, is that it`s circular. It isn`t any other shape.

A friend of mine reminded me of a quote by the famous Anonymous: "Without a common dictionary you can`t play Scrabble." Language isn`t subject to separate opinions and individual languages for each person in a society. Otherwise we have no knowledge at all and no way to share any kind of experience.

A Web site has a definition. It may be a complicated definition, and include as part of its subsidiary concepts such things as code, browsers, and programming, but it`s a definition nonetheless. *How* the Web site is used or looks is ultimately a subjective evaluation.

Yet another sad aspect of modern thought is that when an evaluation and judgement step one point into the subjective, the entire concept of evaluation becomes "just an opinion."

Although it`s true that everyone has a right (and an obligation)  to form an opinion, there`s a world of difference between an educated opinion and a casual utterance based on nothing at all. I think we`re trying to restate the obvious when we say that a Web site critique should have at its basis *some* level of thought and logical rationale.