contructive criticism.

Was kinda nervous about goin to a site with a name like that!!! ??

I like it…not much done in the way of mods, but I’m the kinda guy that like a simple looking site…easy on the eyes eh ??

How to make your site better you ask?

[Moderated: unnecessary diatribe on site’s content]

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
-William Shakespeare

Cheers,
Michael.

Michael, I don’t think that’s at all necessary. In general, it’s not a request for people to vet content when someone asks about a site; it’s a request for input on the layout, the theme, etc.

Now. Give me a good reason why I should repost what I edited out.

niziol,

I agree, “you’re gay” is pretty offensive, but it was truly concieved as a satire article. I was trying to convey the current effeminization of popular culture. I.E., men using more beauty care products than women, and getting their eyebrows waxed. These traits have nothing to do with being a homosexual, as I know many strait men who do this. I guess I did use the term “gay” too loosely in this article. (no pun intended). I was trying to bring light on how the defination of being a “man” has changed. I have not read this in months, and your’re right, it can be very offensive. I guess I wasn’t really thinking about that at the time it was written, I will do my best to properly explain myself in the future. I have decided to remove the article and sorry if it upset you.

-Mike
https://www.ieatpeople.com

You don’t need to apologize, Mike. Your content is your content, and it’s not at all necessary for ANYONE to comment on it one way or the other.

I’m sure you’d like some constructive input about the theme etc. I haven’t had a chance yet but I’ll take a look shortly.

[Ah, Mike – please don’t use your site addy as a sort of sig addendum. We don’t do that here.]

vkaryl,

I realize that, but he really does have a good point. I had all but forgotten about how poorly written it was, being one of my first attempts at satire. I choose to delete it on my own accord. Thanks though.

-Mike
(will do)

Site: I’m not into black, but the bright blue and red touches do add some relief. You manage the insertion of pics very well, with the text flowing logically around them.

It’s easy to use, though for me, not easy to read: light text on dark is very hard. Given the site’s apparent thrust, the black makes sense however.

vkaryl: I offered my opinion on his site, which from his response:

I realize that, but he really does have a good point

appears to have indeed been take as it was intended as constructive. I do apologize if I was a too “direct” to my point, but I feel the point was received and without my posting, the replies afterword are completely out of context. If you feel like we are in need of someone playing censor, then you must apply these, however egregious, censor tactics to the entire subject relating to whatever cause you believe exists to censor.

The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.
-John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

Cheers,
Michael.

Oh no, I don’t think it’s impossible to figure out what went on with your bits missing.

Censor: no one SHOULD have to censor. YOU should know that you simply don’t do the sort of thing you did on a public forum where you’re ostensibly helping.

In any case, while Mike seems to have taken your attack in good part, it WAS an attack, it was totally uncalled for, and that’s an end of it.

I don’t want this to turn into a battle with you, I request that either my post is returned in its entirety or that my post is removed in its entirety.

while I understand that asking for criticism isnt necessarily asking for content criticism, I guess I dont see the point of the moderation and removal.. (just my .02)

I didnt see what he wrote, however I do know I was tempted to say something about the content BEFORE he happened to post, and saw fit not to.

I am sure though that whatever he wrote pales in comparison to a good deal of whats been posted here of late.

*shrug* Good for you for NOT posting. It’s not anyone’s business about what people see fit to post on their personal blogs. When people ask for criticism here, it’s accepted that it’s for what the blog LOOKS like, not what they want to write for consumption, public or otherwise.

If one of the mavens wants it put back, I’ll put it back. Were I the author, I’d be embarrassed to have anyone else read it, but that’s just me….

[Point: I would have done the same no matter WHO posted it. An attack’s an attack.]

lol, its ok, vkaryl, i JUST had to get my daily post in, this was as good a place as any ??

In my opinion, the header is a bit aggressive, as is the blue of the post titles. One of the reasons I am not the biggest fan of most black themes (except for photoblogs) is that colourful headers, post titles and posted images stand out so much that the content text gets lost/faded. My two humble rusty cents worth.

P.S. I think the header needs a bit more padding at the top.

What, you’re keeping a scorecard? *laughing*