This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Webmaster forum > August 2006 > Unprofessionalism in web design
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Unprofessionalism in web design
|
|
|
|
| Leonard Blaisdell 2006-08-19, 3:35 am |
| In article <44e6948e$0$11971$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
Mark Parnell <usenet@markparnell.com.au> wrote:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...006/08/18/11554
> 08025299.html
>
> Discuss. :-)
I assumed the burden was on the doctor and staff to approve the site.
Then I read the 'assurance of a professional copywriter and fine tuning'
which moved the scales of justice toward culpability onto the site
author. The doctor and staff should have approved the site before
showtime regardless. The website author should be culpable for the lie
concerning services. How much is that worth? Perhaps what was
adjudicated.
Oh! And I'm assuming you meant the featured article instead of the site.
leo
--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>
| |
| William Tasso 2006-08-19, 3:35 am |
| Fleeing from the madness of the jungle
Mark Parnell <usenet@markparnell.com.au> stumbled into
news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
>
> Discuss. :-)
copywriting and web design are unhappy bedfellows.
whatever happened to test environments and sign-off procedures?
Being a confident buyer of services is not such a common skill - the
customer should realise you can't outsource problems.
good luck to both of them - sounds like they deserve each other.
--
William Tasso
http://williamtasso.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp
| |
| David Hennessy 2006-08-19, 3:35 am |
| Mark Parnell wrote:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
>
>
> Discuss. :-)
>
Wow... what a foolish consultant. What does a web designer know about
surgery? The consultant erred first by promising to write the content
and select the photos, second by actually doing it, and third by not
insisting that the client provide revised copy. Oh, and fourth by
promising to put the polish on it -- because, what does a web designer
know about surgery?
I've found that a lot of clients don't have any idea what they want to
say on-line (which makes me wonder why they want a web site). Often
times they expect me to write about their business, as if I am somehow
more qualified than they are. I offer instead to rewrite whatever they
provide (as a separate service from the web design), but I'm still clear
that they must be the final authority on what goes live.
Oh, btw... I hated Google Groups... so I finally gave in and *gasp*
called my ISP to reset my lost password. How I have missed Usenet! :-P
--
David Hennessy
http://maidix.com/
| |
| Mark Parnell 2006-08-19, 6:48 am |
| Leonard Blaisdell wrote:
> I assumed the burden was on the doctor and staff to approve the site.
You would think they would want to look at it before it went "live".
> Then I read the 'assurance of a professional copywriter and fine tuning'
> which moved the scales of justice toward culpability onto the site
> author.
For sure. I haven't seen the site in question (presumably it's been
taken down by now - wonder how long it was up before they realised?),
but from the description it certainly sounds rather inappropriate.
That said...
> The doctor and staff should have approved the site before
> showtime regardless.
Indeed.
> Oh! And I'm assuming you meant the featured article instead of the site.
Yes. :-)
--
My email address is valid but not monitored. Use my first name at the
same domain instead.
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| Mark Parnell wrote:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
>
>
> Discuss. :-)
>
I'd say a bad web designer finally got penalized. I'd like to see it
happen more often.
Yes, I agree that the client has a responsibility to approve the site
and contents. However, how many times have you worked on a site and
uploaded it to the server to see how it looks. It's not "ready for
prime time" yet, but you're getting there.
And unless you password protect it, the site is now available to the
world. And it could even be spidered by the search engines.
While I can understanding the scare/scar issue, careful proofreading
should have caught it. And it shouldn't take a copywriter to catch
mistakes like these. Any web designer needs to have a reasonable grasp
of grammar and spelling in their native language!
And although I didn't seen the site, from the article the pictures were
completely inappropriate.
All in all, it looks like this person has no business calling herself a
webmaster/web designer.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
|
| In article <CsxFg.623$Te.216@trnddc07>, david@maidix.com says...
> Mark Parnell wrote:
>
>
> Wow... what a foolish consultant. What does a web designer know about
> surgery? The consultant erred first by promising to write the content
> and select the photos, second by actually doing it, and third by not
> insisting that the client provide revised copy. Oh, and fourth by
> promising to put the polish on it -- because, what does a web designer
> know about surgery?
>
> I've found that a lot of clients don't have any idea what they want to
> say on-line (which makes me wonder why they want a web site). Often
> times they expect me to write about their business, as if I am somehow
> more qualified than they are. I offer instead to rewrite whatever they
> provide (as a separate service from the web design), but I'm still clear
> that they must be the final authority on what goes live.
>
I do the same - I charge an extra $100/page for copywriting, $50/page to
re-write the scribbled notes a client sends me. Typically when they
hear about my upcharge, they suddenly remember how to write their own
copy.
| |
| Matt-the-Hoople 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| Quoth Mark Parnell in alt.www.webmaster
> Discuss. :-)
Alas for the hapless (amateur) designer. They should have known better.
Alas for the plastic surgeon - they should have provided the copy for the site.
Judge Judy sez, 'get the f*ck out of my courtroom - you're both d00fuses!'
--
# www.mattlindi.com
# matt.lindi2@your_clothes_verizon.net
# remove _your_clothes_ to email me
| |
| Matt-the-Hoople 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| Quoth Jerry Stuckle in alt.www.webmaster
> All in all, it looks like this person has no business calling herself a
> webmaster/web designer.
Aye - at the moment. Not having seen the site, I can't render a fully qualified opinion. However, as you pointed out, given the
apparent lack of basic grammar skills it's probably safe to say that the designer is equally lacking across the board.
--
# www.mattlindi.com
# matt.lindi2@your_clothes_verizon.net
# remove _your_clothes_ to email me
| |
| mens libertina 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
|
Mark Parnell wrote:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
>
> Discuss. :-)
>
I don't know how any professional webdesigner would publish the
statement that "children will be afraid of you". This sounds like
there is more to the story than we heard. Surely, the webdesigner
WANTS more business, right? If anything, they should have been extreme
in the other direction, flattering, not insulting.
In any case, perhaps the doctor should have requested some prior work
and withheld part of the payment until the project was approved. ;)
| |
| Swampy Bogtrotter 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| Matt-the-Hoople wrote:
> Quoth Mark Parnell in alt.www.webmaster
>
>
> Alas for the hapless (amateur) designer. They should have known
> better.
>
> Alas for the plastic surgeon - they should have provided the copy for
> the site.
>
> Judge Judy sez, 'get the f*ck out of my courtroom - you're both
> d00fuses!'
A pair of d00fii ?
| |
| Matt-the-Hoople 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| Quoth Swampy Bogtrotter in alt.www.webmaster
>
> A pair of d00fii ?
:-)
suffering from a condition known as d00fia
--
# www.mattlindi.com
# matt.lindi2@your_clothes_verizon.net
# remove _your_clothes_ to email me
| |
|
|
"Jerry Stuckle"
| >
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
| >
| >
| > Discuss. :-)
| >
|
| I'd say a bad web designer finally got penalized. I'd like to see it
| happen more often.
|
| Yes, I agree that the client has a responsibility to approve the site
| and contents. However, how many times have you worked on a site and
| uploaded it to the server to see how it looks. It's not "ready for
| prime time" yet, but you're getting there.
|
| And unless you password protect it, the site is now available to the
| world. And it could even be spidered by the search engines.
|
| While I can understanding the scare/scar issue, careful proofreading
| should have caught it. And it shouldn't take a copywriter to catch
| mistakes like these. Any web designer needs to have a reasonable grasp
| of grammar and spelling in their native language!
|
| And although I didn't seen the site, from the article the pictures were
| completely inappropriate.
|
| All in all, it looks like this person has no business calling herself a
| webmaster/web designer.
Aside from not proofing the site personally (you get what you INSPECT not
what you EXPECT) I'd make a bet the doc played the old 'I'll hire an intern
or an inexperienced dolt to save the cheese as web design is not rocket
science' card.
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| NotMe wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle"
>
> | >
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
> | >
> | >
> | > Discuss. :-)
> | >
> |
> | I'd say a bad web designer finally got penalized. I'd like to see it
> | happen more often.
> |
> | Yes, I agree that the client has a responsibility to approve the site
> | and contents. However, how many times have you worked on a site and
> | uploaded it to the server to see how it looks. It's not "ready for
> | prime time" yet, but you're getting there.
> |
> | And unless you password protect it, the site is now available to the
> | world. And it could even be spidered by the search engines.
> |
> | While I can understanding the scare/scar issue, careful proofreading
> | should have caught it. And it shouldn't take a copywriter to catch
> | mistakes like these. Any web designer needs to have a reasonable grasp
> | of grammar and spelling in their native language!
> |
> | And although I didn't seen the site, from the article the pictures were
> | completely inappropriate.
> |
> | All in all, it looks like this person has no business calling herself a
> | webmaster/web designer.
>
> Aside from not proofing the site personally (you get what you INSPECT not
> what you EXPECT) I'd make a bet the doc played the old 'I'll hire an intern
> or an inexperienced dolt to save the cheese as web design is not rocket
> science' card.
>
>
>
>
Could be. But then he wouldn't have a reason to complain - or get
almost $5K from her, would he?
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
|
| "Jerry Stuckle"
| >
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...5408025299.html
| > | I'd say a bad web designer finally got penalized. I'd like to see it
| > | happen more often.
| > |
| > | Yes, I agree that the client has a responsibility to approve the site
| > | and contents. However, how many times have you worked on a site and
| > | uploaded it to the server to see how it looks. It's not "ready for
| > | prime time" yet, but you're getting there.
| > |
| > | And unless you password protect it, the site is now available to the
| > | world. And it could even be spidered by the search engines.
| > |
| > | While I can understanding the scare/scar issue, careful proofreading
| > | should have caught it. And it shouldn't take a copywriter to catch
| > | mistakes like these. Any web designer needs to have a reasonable
grasp
| > | of grammar and spelling in their native language!
| > |
| > | And although I didn't seen the site, from the article the pictures
were
| > | completely inappropriate.
| > |
| > | All in all, it looks like this person has no business calling herself
a
| > | webmaster/web designer.
| >
| > Aside from not proofing the site personally (you get what you INSPECT
not
| > what you EXPECT) I'd make a bet the doc played the old 'I'll hire an
intern
| > or an inexperienced dolt to save the cheese as web design is not rocket
| > science' card.
| >
|
| Could be. But then he wouldn't have a reason to complain - or get
| almost $5K from her, would he?
Getting a judgment and collecting are two different events.
| |
| Karl Groves 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:WFIFg.3$j25.1@newsfe07.lga:
> "Jerry Stuckle"
>| Could be. But then he wouldn't have a reason to complain - or get
>| almost $5K from her, would he?
>
> Getting a judgment and collecting are two different events.
>
A judgment - and especially an unpaid one - is a very nasty black mark on
someone's credit.
A $5k unpaid judgment could make or break someone's ability to get a car, a
house, or a line of credit for their business.
--
Karl Groves
www.karlcore.com
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-19, 6:44 pm |
| NotMe wrote
> Getting a judgment and collecting are two different events.
Indeed.
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| NotMe 2006-08-19, 10:43 pm |
|
"Karl Groves"
| >| Could be. But then he wouldn't have a reason to complain - or get
| >| almost $5K from her, would he?
| >
| > Getting a judgment and collecting are two different events.
| >
|
| A judgment - and especially an unpaid one - is a very nasty black mark on
| someone's credit.
|
| A $5k unpaid judgment could make or break someone's ability to get a car,
a
| house, or a line of credit for their business.
Take my word for it a judgment only slow things down and not by much.
| |
| Karl Groves 2006-08-19, 10:43 pm |
| "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:InPFg.209$Na7.115@newsfe02.lga:
>
> "Karl Groves"
>
>| >| Could be. But then he wouldn't have a reason to complain - or get
>| >| almost $5K from her, would he?
>| >
>| > Getting a judgment and collecting are two different events.
>| >
>|
>| A judgment - and especially an unpaid one - is a very nasty black
>| mark on someone's credit.
>|
>| A $5k unpaid judgment could make or break someone's ability to get a
>| car,
> a
>| house, or a line of credit for their business.
>
> Take my word for it a judgment only slow things down and not by much.
>
Take my word for it, a judgment really XXXXs your credit.
--
Karl Groves
www.karlcore.com
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2006-08-19, 10:43 pm |
| Karl Groves wrote:
> "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:InPFg.209$Na7.115@newsfe02.lga:
>
>
>
>
> Take my word for it, a judgment really XXXXs your credit.
>
>
Yep, I agree, Karl. In the U.S., someone with an unpaid judgment on
their credit report will find it virtually impossible to get credit.
And the person getting the judgment can do all kinds of things to collect.
About the only restriction is in most states you can't take their house.
But most everything else can be fair game.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|