Web Development optimize

This is why your website sucks

C. Todd Fluhr pulls no punches in telling you exactly why your website is unsuccessful, boring, forgotten, and basically a waste of your initial investment. Here's what you should do about it.

"You don't understand the humiliation of it!  To be tricked out of the single assumption that makes our existence bearable. That somebody is watching. We need an audience."

- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Tom Stoppard

Your website probably sucks. I say this with a high degree of confidence even though I haven't seen it. But wait, you're thinking, that's crazy-talk! How could someone possibly make such a blanket-statement about something they've never even seen?

The answer, my friend, is simply that most websites do suck. The vast majority are designed based on paradigms established in the late 1990's. They act as "online brochures" or static calling cards to credential their owner in some way. The website may be an amazing blend of art and function, but is it essential to the daily web-browsing routine of your target audience?

This article is about why your website is probably failing to attract and support the traffic you once so optimistically envisioned. If you think your sole problem is to be found in a mere code fix or SEO consultant, then the things I'm about to say may make no sense to you. If you think a website alone is the answer to getting your message out to the public, again, this may not be the article for you. And for those who think of websites as websites, you need to change your perspective or find a way to travel back in time to the year 1999.

For those looking for practical design tips and common mistakes, fear not. Such shall be posted at the end of this article for your consideration regarding your own web endeavors.

But first let me draw your attention to something referred to as "User-Centered Design" or UCD. This is not to be confused with OCD-oriented design which presumes the average web-visitor has an average attention span of less than 4 seconds and must be impaled on a flashy fish hook before-clicking off your site. UCD is a design philosophy that emphasizes the needs and wants of your anticipated audience.

I humbly submit that proper attention to UCD is dramatically more important than any other consideration when designing your website.  f a user is getting what they want and expect from your site, they will be happy users. However good your SEO and other support marketing of the site, if the user isn't getting what they want from it, it will eventually wither and die.

Before delving deeper into UCD, I would be grievously remiss if I failed to mention the second-most important aspect of web design: marketing the site. I'm often confronted with clients who labor under the mistaken belief that having a good website is an end unto itself. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even "web savvy" clients make this mistake and rely on search engines to drive visitors to their site. When confronted with such unbridled optimism, I explain it this way. A website is like a television channel. You might have some of the most achingly cool original shows ever conceived by the mind of man, but how will people know which channel to turn to? A TV guide listing is a good start (i.e., Search Engine Optimization), but that alone isn't enough.

A good web marketing plan must include more than just a good SEO component. It must also include a comprehensive strategy including social networking, cross-promotion, and traditional marketing in print, radio, and television advertisements. Yes, I said traditional advertising. If your website caters to a specialty market (for example a client who sells equine jewelry for horse shows), then an ad in Saddle and Bridle magazine is a must.

But assuming even an excellent promotional campaign and SEO, if your website doesn't provide what the users want, you just might find your website going the way of MySpace. Classic examples of heavily-promoted websites that failed to deliver what their users wanted: Stage6, Digg, pets.com, and yahooauctions.com. All of these sites offered good services and were heavily supported with advertising. But in the end, they couldn't keep their audience.

Unless you're designing your website to deliver what your audience wants, needs, and expects, your website sucks. In the end, it will fail to deliver whatever hoped-for results you had planned. It may be pretty, it may function wonderfully, it may even be blessed with hundreds of thousands of initial visitors due to good marketing or the vicissitudes of the viral Gods. But if users aren't getting what they want, it's only a matter of time before you join the dot.graveyard.

So how to design for UCD?  First and foremost you need to remove yourself from the equation. It's not about what you want to communicate or the things you think they want: it's about what they think they want. You already have a preconceived notion as to what your audience wants. You are literally too close to the trees to see the forest from the outside. It's imperative to hire a professional who understands the importance of UCD and who will spend the time getting into the mind-space of the audience. You need someone who really understands how the audience thinks and how that translates into user-interface and content delivery.

Once the user-experience has been defined, you must understand this is only the beginning. A one-time only visitor to your website is next to useless. You want repeat visits, loyalty and word-of-mouth. These things have to be earned by delivering more than your audience expects: it's delivering what they need and that translates as a constant flow of new information, involvement, and support. An entertainment website that isn't updated daily is as useful as last week's newspaper. Fresh and relevant content is essential to staying alive in today's marketplace.

If your website isn't providing fresh content, pertinent updates, and in-tune with the evolving needs of your audience, then your website sucks. You might argue that a well-maintained blog may be the answer, and sometimes it can be.

In today's market convergence of web, television, and radio, a daily update of new content is essential to longevity. No longer can a company feel secure with a one-time only investment in a good website. They need to budget for the care and feeding of the site. If your online investment ends at the launch of your website, then the only thing you've purchased is a product that will be stale and obsolete four seconds after a visitor has clicked on it.

What strategies do you have in place to keep your website alive and relevant? Do you rely on SEO or a basic need-driven customer base for your website? Or do you have a growing base of loyal web visitors who consider your website a daily essential? Have you found the secret of a self-sustaining turn-key site that requires no updating or maintenance to be successful? Share your experience here with what's worked and not worked for your site. Inquiring minds want to know.

Now, for the Big List of Basic Do's, Don'ts, and Always for today's web design

  • Don't have a intro or splash page that can't be skipped.
  • Don't have music. If you must, for heaven's sake include an "off" or "mute" option.
  • Don't assume SEO alone will bring the masses to you. Explore strategies to go to the masses. Social networking, YouTube channels, and traditional print media in targeted periodicals should be considered.
  • Do be user-friendly and easy to navigate.
  • Don't impose an artificial veneer or template. Reflect the "look and feel" of the product or message. Your design can be boring so long as the content is not.
  • Don't over-sell your content.
  • Do drive users towards an objective.
  • Don't rely on users to figure out the navigation: keep it obvious.
  • Don't load your website with gadgets. There was a time when "hit counters" were the "in" thing. It was like shouting to the world, "Hey, see, I'm popular!" Now it just says, "Hey, I live in 1998."
  • Do avoid splash pages and over-use of flash.
  • Do avoid "ad" and "Banner" clutter.
  • Do include social networking links.
  • Do check for cross-platform browser compatibility.
  • Do design your website to be viewed from mobile devices.
  • Don't look like an advertisement!
  • Do avoid animations on intro pages: they will take time to load on slower connections.
  • Don't use pop ups or ads from advertisers you can't control.
  • Do use CSS style sheets.
  • Do learn more about UCD: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-centered_design

About

Todd Fluhr is a freelance writer and multimedia designer. A self-described "Shockwave Rider" of technology, culture, and creativity, he has been involved in the interactive entertainment industry since the early 90's. He hopes to find time to sleep ...

105 comments
blogfollow
blogfollow

The difficulty in easily explaining this area of law and the many types of securities that are affected. airlines south africa

MariaaJohanson
MariaaJohanson

What a great effort on trying to make incisions on a path. I always find so much informative things from here.

insuranceman1
insuranceman1

I understand the shock value you were going for with that incredibly vague headline, but the article follows up the directionless attacks by assuming all businesses operate with the same public opinions. Marketing an insurance quote and marketing a mascara line are remarkably different functions, and the flashy glitzy attention-grabbing recommendations of this article will only feasibly work for one of the two.

PQAlex
PQAlex

both this article and the comments

beck.joycem
beck.joycem

"A web site" as a definition of function is no more useful than "a book". A good design for a dictionary wouldn't be considered for a children's story book, a clothes catalogue needs to look different to a Java textbook. Web sites that serve as parking lots for work portfolios, scientific reference, a cheese-selling site, and a local 'newspaper' [I]should[/I] be totally different in structure, style and 'feel'. Some must be updated at least daily, some barely annually. Some must have lots of high quality pictures, some none. Some must be attractive, for others they only need to be legible and printable. Some need animations and sound, others don't. The central point is that the audience has needs and wants from the site as different as their needs and wants from books, and far too many sites fail to address those needs and wants. The author's site does address the needs and wants of its audience - those criticising it are not the target audience.

MacGuyver66
MacGuyver66

...has the genius of some of the commenters above. I'm frankly surprised at how many people took Todd's article as a personal kick in the nuts or affront to their intelligence; arguing semantics and entry level web subject matter. Basically, the information is useful for many, but not all, just as every other article ever written is not for everyone in every audience. I mean, come on, curry addicted lepers in Suriname have a different agenda/interest set than say, closeted Hmong christmas fetishests. Work with me here. Personally, I'd rather not hear people bitch. Todd's a writer trying to write to his audience. Tell him what you want to hear, not challenge him to a Tweetle Beetle battle in the slow lane of Al Gore's interweb highway. Whatever. There won't be peace in the Middle East any time soon. Spose we can't expect it here, either.

glynn
glynn

Some good advice but it would have been more creditable if the author had included the URL of a website he designed that doesn't suck

tacman1123
tacman1123

'If you must, for heaven???s sake include an ???off??? or ???mute??? option.' I would add "And make sure the sound is off until the user explicitly turns it on". It's hard to beat the time leaving a site when it starts blaring and you're in a shared office, or half-listening to a conference call, or whatever.

BlazingEagle
BlazingEagle

Hiring a professional can be helpful or harmful depending upon the attitude, knowledge & skill of the professional. Now, I???m NOT denigrating the professional nor devaluing their knowledge & expertise, but, Obviously, Not everyone can afford professional website consulting & offering advice in layman???s terms in a way free of haughty arrogance can be quite beneficial to amateur web developers.

Peconet Tietokoneet
Peconet Tietokoneet

You are not trying to sell yourself are you? It seems to me like you are in some king of way. What does it matter to you if a person, or persons, take some time reading a book slowly? Why all of a sudden there must be a rush to see ALL of the nice sites (am i missing something here) on the internet including yours, that is why you are on here is it not? Why should there be this and that way of doing things just to say "hey look what i have done", such as your site that says VERY little. a big webpage in a small area and small text. You might be good at speaking and all of what you do but some people are put off by that, HENCE not going to your site, or not staying on it for very long. You sound a bit pushy to me, a sort of person i despise, a sort of person of whom likes to have control over the masses that you seem to like, are you looking for some attention of some kind? I like to read a good magazine not with a stop watch i might add, if i want what you are suggesting then i will do some running/sports of some sorts. Sorry, but you come over like a dictator, what i call a PUSHER. Some people like to see stupid things, it is what makes us laugh, makes us more enjoyable to others. To be quite honest i have not heard of you, but i have heard of O'reilly he does have some very good stuff.

jck
jck

[b]"Do avoid ???ad??? and ???Banner??? clutter. Do include social networking links.[/b] Isn't this contradictory? Clutter is okay as long as it's a social network?

hrlngrv?
hrlngrv?

IMO, the BBC's web site is much better than any US news broadcasters', and a lot better than Deutche Welle, France24 and Al Jazeera. As for online print media, my favorite is The Economist's print edition page, which is good precisely because it's so close to the TOC in the actual magazine. [Point: there are a few cases where old fashioned is best. IIABDFI.] In terms of e-commerce sites I use, my bank and electric utility have a big advantage over Travelers Insurance: I don't have to click a @#$%&*! link to log on to pay bills. A site meant to take customer payments should require as FEW user interactions as possible for customers to make payments. That said, Firefox is my browser, and as long as it supports ad blocking and Customize Your Web, I can clean up any web site I visit frequently. I'm willing to view static ads, but I block any & all flash ads.

roland.beaumont
roland.beaumont

Regardless of what anybody thinks, the sheer volume of debate on this topic means the author emoted a response. For that well done, as to whether or not he is right, you can be the judge!!

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

It does occur to me that perhaps I could have used gentler language in pointing out the basic (yes, even rudimentary) value of applying UCD to web design. Perhaps if I'd just painted the word on a fluffy unicorn labeled "any one's website but yours" folks would have replied differently, if they'd felt moved to reply at all. But the mere fact so many have replied with such energy and passion is indicative of something. Perhaps I offended with my hyperbole, or perhaps some nerves were tweaked, or even a mixture of both. The fact is I felt most would disregard the subject of UCD as "too basic to even be worth considering." It's not. It's very important. In order to provoke a reaction and discussion to the subject, I chose the tactic of using provocative words. And you know what? It worked. Look how many people ended up responding. In the end, I achieved repeat visitors to post and reply in the talk back section. After all, in the end it's passion that moves people to think. If, after thinking about your own web site you reach the decision that my comments here were not useful, then I am glad for you. And for those who perhaps find something to apply to their web strategy, I humbly hope you understand why I did what I did. For anyone else who might have simply disliked my approach or choice of words, well, good for you! Everyone should always question what they read and engage the author when they disagree. Meanwhile, I will continue to write in whatever manner the subject demands of me. If I may offer a word of advice when reading my articles, I humbly suggest keeping such authors as Ambrose Bierce or Jonathan Swift in mind. I know I can't hold a candle to those great minds. All I wish to do is to make people think about the subjects. It really is nothing but a modest proposal.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

"Its imperative to hire a professional who understands the importance of UCD and who will spend the time getting into the mind-space of the audience. You need someone who really understands how the audience thinks and how that translates into user-interface and content delivery." I think those of us who 'erm viewed the post with some disdain had a key question. What audience? TR believes they aimed the current site design at it's audience, many of us have posted that we feel that it hasn't aimed at us. About the only help hiring a professional who understands UCD would have been, is they could have blamed him. Near all the things that were mentioned in the following do's and don'ts anyone with double digit IQ could have come up with....

mckinnej
mckinnej

I know I'm going to get voted down into oblivion for this but many of the comments reveal the authors are using their heads for hat racks rather than a container for their brains. What the article author is offering you is a tool kit to apply as needed. Not every task needs a hammer, but the next one might, so having a hammer in your kit is a good idea. To throw out the whole toolkit just because it has a hammer you don't need at the moment is short-sighted and just plain foolish. Maybe it's just the way I think, but I always break things down into component parts to be used as necessary. I have a rather unique web site with a small target audience. The majority of these ideas are irrelevant to it such as browser compatibility. My users are all locked into IE, so whether or not it works with Firefox or Opera is not even a consideration. However there are other things that might make our site better, so I'll take a look at them. You know, like that toolkit thing. I don't need that hammer right now, but that screwdriver is just what I need.

somethinggood4
somethinggood4

My boss has said that he worries that we don't get enough repeat traffic from our web site. But we do interior design; our web site is a portfolio of our best work to inspire people to hire us to reinvent their spaces. I can't put new pictures up every day - we don't finish jobs that fast! How am I supposed to create a site that people will come back to again and again, if the reason people came in the first place was to see images of his work?

Dethpod
Dethpod

http://www.ctfluhr.com/ SRSLY? Layout with tables and transparent images? Inline CSS? You HAVE to be kidding me. Your site reeks of ten years ago. Nobody uses tables for layout. That is Rule #1. And you have the nerve to tell me that my website sucks? I would never hire you let alone recommend you to, well, anyone.

BlazingEagle
BlazingEagle

Why waste your time replying to a topic regarding an article you find "annoying"? Sheesh

hippiekarl
hippiekarl

The spirited discussion was integral to the article's content; is that what 'tweetle beetle' means? The author steadfastly refused to aknowledge the glaring irony of his premise "Why YOUR website sucks" in light of his OWN site, and accused those of us who noted the irony of being ignorant of HIS website's apparantly implicit exemption from his own web design basics. That's hardly 'bitching'; the acrimory devolved from his attempt to defend the bad example his own work supplied to the title assumption about 'YOUR' website....and they made up afterwards, anyhow (Tony and Todd). That's what happens on TR unlike your Middle East analogy. ;)

roland.beaumont
roland.beaumont

You are sooooooooooooooooo right on this one. I specialise in very simple websites, with very simple navigation, big letters and words, small pictures. People who come to my sites are looking to be informed, at their pace and without pressure to move on, in particular they want to come back next week to finish off, without having to learn yet another set of web pages, as the author has learnt yet another clever trick in flash or whatever. R

jeremial-21966916363912016372987921703527
jeremial-21966916363912016372987921703527

I agree that it has generated a fair amount of debate. However, it appears 90% of that debate is geared toward the author's arrogance and lack of professionalism. I'm curious if that still counts as a success for the article itself, or simply success for one individual trying to garner any amount of attention possible, positive or negative...

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

you done good. The only real disconnect is if you had posted this on say Business Republic, they would have wanted Todd's ten step guid to designing a brilliant web site. Your reception here would have been as nothing comparered to the furor generated by telling them there's no such animal. To techs it looked like you were saying UCD is a ten step guide... The real value of UCD is it gives you framework to think in, it's not UCD that's missing from the process of designing and implementing a web site, it's thinking...

rjhawkin
rjhawkin

The Purpose of a blog discussion is to generate comments. Using slightly invective wording is one way to do that when the content could be seen as bland by some. I do however think you need to learn to stop feeding the trolls by getting defensive about their comments. As a tip and a useful reason to actually have content in this comment I suggest that people read the text of any website aloud. Not just mouthing the words but actually saying them audibly. This forces you to look at all of the words, not the words floating in your head. If it sounds stilted and stunted, then a fresh reader will likely find it so as well.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

If you have a web site and only asked yourself "what audience?" after reading my article, then I don't wonder that you consider UCD nothing more but three nonsensical letters without meaning or context. I invite disdain and dispute, but I question anyone who thinks it useless or pointless to consider the user's needs and habits when designing a product.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Did a UCD type come up with the design that keeps me adding posts instead of replying or not. Perhaps the audience they should have aimed at was thickie. :(

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

I admit my article was over-generalized and full of hammers. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Or mix bad metaphors and cliches like I'm doing. I am only trying to get designers to consider the user and audience in their design process. I don't think that's a bad message.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

A portfolio site is a special breed of animal. It serves as a sort of online brochure that individuals are directed to. It doesn't need a recurring daily or hourly audience. If your site is designed as a reference point for potential clients, and its serving that goal, then it's a success. I should have mentioned this specifically because people are attacking me for my "portfolio" site. By failing to distinguish between "audience-driven" websites and "credentialing" websites, I've reaped a good deal of much-deserved flack. I really should have specified my criticisms were meant for websites who's long term survival depended on a constantly large amount of hits per day, like entertainment or social networking sites. In the end, if your website is doing exactly what you designed it to do, and is delivering exactly what you want it to deliver, it's a success.

bobp
bobp

How do you layout a page if you don't use tables? Knowing the alternative would increase my knowledge. Thanks.

roijbl
roijbl

Seriously? I've used tables and tables within tables for years when I want to lock down the exact size and appearance of a web site or portion of a web site. Of course they are more difficult to use and take a bit more time if you don't have the experience, but then again I suppose hand coding HTML is something that nobody does much of now. Is there a rule # for that?

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

If my website were designed to draw traffic, keep an audience, or used in any way whatsoever to a general audience, you'd be 100% correct. But, alas, you are not correct. My site is nothing more than a personal online portfolio designed for one or two directed visitors a week. It is nothing but a repository for my portfolio material, however puerile and untalented such content may be. It serves only as a personal little vanity trinket that exists for the sole purpose of having a link handy when someone requests to see a particular example of my graphics, writing, or videos. Someone might say, "Hey, can I see one of your short stories or that graphic you did of the USPS kiosk?" And I say, "Sure, here's a link, now go play in traffic." My website isn't designed or meant for a general audience of anything. The context of my site serves only as an online placeholder for my stuff. Nothing else. It's not a commercial site meant to draw anyone. I tend to refer someone to it about once a week, and if it got twice that in hits, I'd be shocked. I was writing for real businesses who need their websites to perform for real audiences. If you want to invalidate my message by trying to shoot the messenger, perhaps it would be better in the future if you loaded the gun first with a real bullet. Using my online repository for pictures and personal junk is hardly a valid target.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

It is f'ing awful though. I didn't want to stay, I know that. Looked like an emo's bathroom to me.

Dethpod
Dethpod

The image on your landing page is ~300k. That is just flat stupid.

roland.beaumont
roland.beaumont

Even I missed that, thanks for the nudge I needed :-)

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

and one of TR's major drives is to generate traffic to piggy back their sponsors stuff on. So he pleased at least one important audience with that, and those of us who've come here and contributed have derived some pleaseure even if it was only to call him names. He's up to two different audiences whichhas got to be success in anyone's book. If he was sellling Todd's ten step guide to successful websites, then h'ed be a failure. There again, there's no such thing as bad publicity...

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

it's a hot iron with which to de-crease the perspective. Apply with care.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

What we are saying is before you can make a go of UCD, you have to define the user(s) yu are going to centre your design around. What sort of audience do you want? If it's people with a shoe, fetish, well easy. Those interested in effective web sites. Three maybe four groups in there isn't there. That might suggest a fairly neutral home page with four links to ways through it aiming at your four groups I guarentee if you try to aim at the four types all the way through the site, you'll miss all of them...

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

You're supposed to criticize me here, not prove my point!

mckinnej
mckinnej

I totally agree with you. I thought it was a good article. It's a nice "wake up call" for site designers to step back and take an objective look at their site from a different perspective.

Dethpod
Dethpod

Tables are for tabular data. not layout. If you keep on doing what you have been doing for years it will eventually bite you. Things change and it might be a good idea to change with the times. There is a very good reason to not use tables. Look it up.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

My website is designed for an audience of one: me. I deeply apologize if it fails to accommodate anyone else, especially those who lack taste, intelligence, or the ability to discuss a subject without resorting to personal attacks.

bobp
bobp

I went to Todd's website with an old Dell and it loaded almost instantly. What is the problem with that? I use medium speed DSL.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

Bad if a random web surfer gets tired of waiting for it? Sure. Screw 'em. The site's not for them. Bad if you're connecting on a dial up modem? Get a real internet connection. I don't care if my stuff loads slow for luddites. They should be out washing their horse and buggies instead of visiting my site. Bad because it looks like crap? Now that would hurt my feelings. But I don't care: my site isn't designed for anyone but me, and the occasional person to whom I will send a link to a specific sample image, document, or hidden directory of pirated movies.

roland.beaumont
roland.beaumont

You're right Tony, so often you see articles written, regardless of their quality, to which the numbers of replies is a fat healthy zero. Perhaps Guy is paid on the numbers of complaints he receives. :-)

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

you had been playing the uproar game, but other than that I wouldn't worry about it. Forums are a medium where you need and want someone to disagree with you, its better if it's intelligent debate, intead of projection and contextual misunderstanding but it's not necessary. Overall TR are happy with you, and you've shown an excelent understanding of your audience, we are a contentious lot.

santeewelding
santeewelding

Don't worry. If how I received it was not a complete pan -- it wasn't; I was only jostling you -- then you have little to worry about in the scheme of the universe.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

... by the way my article was received.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

I'm just saying sometimes what the speaker thinks they are saying isn't the same thing the audience is hearing or expecting.

Dethpod
Dethpod

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. Christ Almighty, give it a rest and get a freakin life for fark's sake. Look, it is apparent that you are a sh!!ty web designer (BTW "web designer" is code fore "I can't do that") with self esteem/insecurity issues. Do yourself a favor and let it rest because the longer you argue with these ppl the more you look like a loser. Personally I am embarrassed to even share the slightest bit of genome with you and that you are even remotely related to my craft. Unbelievable.

Dethpod
Dethpod

I have seen guys like you come and go for years. Mostly marketing and design ppl that can talk the talk but can't walk the walk. The client doesn't know that so you get away with it... Until they ask you to do something with their site other than have it look nice. Then you back pedal and see if you can get DW to do it and If DW can't do it neither can you. Sound about right? We have a term for "web designers" and marketing ppl. It is called "I can't do that". So quit BS'ing ppl. You are a hack and you and I both know it. Actually don't. Eventually your clients will become my clients

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

... as I tend to have a partner available.

toddfluhr
toddfluhr

were aimed at those with websites seeking a large number of satisfied repeat visitors. If you are seriously trying to state as a thesis that one person's personal portfolio site requires the same demographic numbers as an amazon.com or aintitcool.com, then I'm afraid I may be unable to write to a low enough level to adequately explain the difference. Personal vanity sites and large-traffic business websites are not in the same animal kingdom. To judge one by the other is not only ridiculous, it betrays a seriously lacking intellect.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

You don't want one of them... So audience of one, are you a repeat vistor as well... Sort of getting our drift here? One man's user centric design is anothers ugly coloured dreck? You do's and don't were basically stay away from exteremes were they not? Do as I say not as I do, is not the cleverest tactic to prove a point is it?

Dethpod
Dethpod

Then why have a site at all? Google docs and bit torrent could handle that. What gets me is how you are complacent with your own mediocrity and all too ready to criticize others. Those who can't teach, critique. Fail defined.