This is what happens when I get obsessed on Serenity posts; I miss the drama.
I suspect this is a good thing. Had I seen and read the original thread, I would have probably jumped in just as deep.
My quick and unrequested, well-after-the-fact two cents: TomD was too blunt and OSC overreacted.
Comments on the look and feel of the place, even well-meaning ones, were unasked-for and premature. As stated, no one even knew yet that this would be the final design. A better approach, if one had to be made, would be to ask first if this was the final design before tearing into it. When I design sites I often throw up placeholder graphics and incomplete designs so I can get approval or criticism on the layout before I put a ton of work into it.
Also? "Eye-crushingly ugly" was harsh. "Doesn't work for me" is equally accurate without the loaded words, and modifiers like "dunno if this is what you're going for, but to me etc etc" would be a more polite way to offer criticism from out of nowhere.
But OSC seems to have picked up the impression that TomD would delight in the magazine's failure, and I didn't get that at all. I had the impression that TomD very much wanted it to succeed, and was offering criticism to correct what he perceived as obstructions to its success based on his own experiences as a web designer. That he was blunt about it is because he's Tom.
One thing I do hope doesn't get overlooked because of this: please, please have other people look at the site before it goes live. I recommend this to anyone designing a website. If you base it solely on what you like without beta-testing it with other people you are unnecessarily limiting your audience. No matter how cool your design is, have some people who have never seen it before try to use it while you watch. I've seen some wonderfully crafed sites fail because readers felt lost or confused, while the designers wonder how anyone couldn't have seen that the green Wuffle! button was a home page link.
This experience might turn you off letting Hatrackers see it and that's fine -- and I have no idea if there are any problems, I haven't seen the site -- but please make sure someone who hasn't been staring at it nonstop for weeks try and navigate around it and tell you what they think, if you haven't already.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also like these chips, but I prefer them in the sour cream and onion flavour, which I can never find!
Posts: 870 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They make those in sour cream and cheddar, too, you know. Not the real thing, but when counting calories, an acceptable place-holder.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now, chips are great and all, but can we move on to chocolate that we love? These new take 5s from Hersheys are killer! Pretzels inside, yum!
Posts: 870 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not the real thing my booty! I like them better than most brands of chips. The only flavours I ever see are BBQ and Original though. Posts: 870 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
It is SO imcompatable with weight watchers. well, not entirely, but the amount of chocolate I'd LIKE to have is... sigh
Posts: 772 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Treason, have you checked Subway? In my experience, they often have 4 to 6 flavors of Baked Lays on the chip rack.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a bit drunk right now... (that seems to be happening more often) but I wrote OSC this email... Don't mean to distract from the chips.. please continue eating.. *munch*munch*
quote: Hello OSC, it’s Telperion… I just wanted to send you and email about the recent tiff with Tom D. I just wanted to give my support and I hope things work out. Tom does love you….he wouldn’t have devoted so many years to you and this forum if he didn’t. However, I do recognize that he was lacking in the constructive part of his criticism. True, Tom looks for a reaction… but don’t we all? Why post if we don’t expect a response from the public? Or even write for that matter? Of course it’s a little different because you earn a living from your writing. Maybe I’m being too optimistic about people’s intentions, but I think Tom was trying to help you out by criticizing the new web site for you magazine. Granted Tom is a Liberal, as am I, and like to spread his thoughts/belief around… but it’s done for the hope for the betterment of Mankind…to make people THINK…. As apposed to follow blindly. He might come off as hostile form time to time because of his views and his way of expressing them…but his hear it in the right place I think. Just as yours is. You both have a huge love for Civilization and its preservation. I too try and fight the good fight for the future of the Human race. In my job I’m faced with the ignorant all the time. Mostly from my co-workers. And often it is religion that they fall back too instead of critical thinking. So I understand the frustration. It goes on and on of course, and I’ll spare you the details…I know you’re time is limited. Anyway, you have created what you set out to, at least in part, a community of your very own.. Hatrack. And you occupy an interesting place in that community.. You are both it’s “god” and citizen. And as a legend you are subject to sometimes undue criticism as the “government” of our forum. This happens in all e-communities… and while we are more evolved than most and understand the nature of polite community more than most we sometimes fall short. The best solution for this is to talk and be active and show that you are a “real boy”… but of course that is very difficult due to your schedule and limited time you can afford to be online.
Of course we still have to factor in your livelihood with your good name and reputation… Who am I to say in the end… I have no degree in economics. What I feel is that Tom D was being critical for your sake… as apposed for the sake of bringing you down. Like “see how bad I think this site is compared to the awesomeness of OSC’s work, it might drive people away”…
Anyway, I give my support to you and this great online community. Don’t loose heart. We support you, even if we disagree with you from time to time.
quote:I've seen chocolate-covered potato chips, though.
Wow. Ew. See, I can deal with chocolate-covered pretzels because the pretzels used aren't generally that salty. I can't imagine chocolate-covered potato chips, though.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad this thread seems to have bounced fluffy, but can I just say that I am extremely excited about this new magazine?
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Treason: White chocolate shouldn't even qualify as chocolate.
Someone named Treason WOULD make ridiculous statements like that.
White chocolate is simply chocolate that has been purified of its sins and ascended to a higher plane. O:)
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wise and wonderful friend, from Hatrack actually, told me that dark chocolate is high in iron Posts: 772 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I've just discovered dark chocolate M&Ms. I am a happy woman. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted
The problem with many chocolate covered pretzels is that the chocolate that covers them often isn't of very good quality.
The solution is to dip pretzels in Nutella. This way one can also control the chocoalate-to-pretzel ratio.
What I have yet to do, however, is to find some really good peanut butter-filled pretzel nuggets to dip in Nutella.
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rivka, chocolate is supposed to be sinful, which is why dark chocolate is the best kind. I like mine about 70% sinful.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Megan, the solution to your problem is to buy them in bulk when you find them and store them in the freezer.
According to the M&Ms website, they're back for a limited time-- through early November-- and are available at Kroger, Target, and Evil Store of Evilness-- excuse me, Wal-Mart. Or, you can shop the M&M store online.Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, now I'm going to have to go out and buy some chocolate, melt it, and coat some Ruffles in it (I like Lays, but I doubt they'd hold up to chocolate-coating.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
I've dipped strawberries and pretzels before, it wouldn't be hard. I just don't have the raw materials.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
I go through chocolate rather fast when I'm pregnant.
Don't even talk about chips, if they come in the house they're gone within 36 hours at the very most.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Valrhona chocolate is the best-and if we take "salty" to mean "has salt in it" then chocolate totally applies!
Posts: 3493 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
Your microwave broken? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
