| Author |
 Topic  |
|
DESIRELINESCO.UK
New Member
United Kingdom
86 Posts |
 Posted - 20 March 2007 : 21:54:30
|
Ha! I don't want to belittle the debate, but can you imagine?!
Font by Eric Gill
Colour by Pantone
Grid Layout by post WWII Swiss Futurists
Golden Section by Pythagorus (I think!)
Photo Editing by Photoshop
Cameras by Olympus and Canon
iBook by Mac
Internet Connection by BT, etc., etc., etc....
There would be more credits than content.
There's almost an art project in that!
r
Desire Lines:
Belfast based fine art photography and design.
www.desirelines.co.uk |
 |
|
|
Thoughtscape
Average Member
Australia
538 Posts |
Posted - 20 March 2007 : 22:44:00
|
Pythagoras.....I like that!
And it's not belittling the debate. Crediting the site host is quite analogous to that level of ridiculous acknowledgement.
still giggling...[need a 'snickering' icon].
www.thoughtscape.com.au
Communication Strategy Consultants
...and our other site
www.jazzopoly.com.au
Cool Jazz/Sophisticated Swing |
|
|
|
Simon
Junior Member
United Kingdom
283 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 08:54:07
|
quote:
And it's not belittling the debate
I disagree
quote:
Crediting the site host is quite analogous to that level of ridiculous acknowledgement.
Absolutely not.
There's too much lazy thinking in the whole of this forum...in my view (for what it's worth)...the level of "debate" (and questioning) has deteriorated since about Christmas. Even without Greg around....
Simon from
www.myexperienceof.net |
|
|
|
discostars
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1666 Posts |
|
|
DESIRELINESCO.UK
New Member
United Kingdom
86 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 10:16:46
|
Hi Simon,
I'm sorry that you feel I have belittled the debate, but to accuse myself, samantha and the majority of other posters in this debate so far of "lazy thinking" is simply a step too far.
I can appreciate that you may disagree with the points raised, but to immediately discount them as somehow intellectually inferior to your own point of view smacks only of the desperation of those unable to produce a counter argument.
If you reread my post in the spirit it was written, rather than somehow seeing it as some sort of personal attack, you will see (at least, I hope!) that, even though it was written in jest, the point it raised was a serious one. Basically, as sam said, we do not credit the mass produced elements of anything creative we produce (and, however melodramatic it may sound, website creation is creative) and, to do so, would be quite ridiculous- how would we know where to stop? If we credit the site host, do we then credit the internet connection that made it possible, or the computer on which we designed the site?
I, for one, have enjoyed reading the points raised in this debate and hope it continues.
r
Desire Lines:
Belfast based fine art photography and design.
www.desirelines.co.uk |
|
|
|
Thoughtscape
Average Member
Australia
538 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 10:21:34
|
I seem to have forgotten vital site acknowlegements, well one anyway: Derogatory comments provided by ill-informed, rock throwing peasants.
Simon: Feel free to put your views out there if you have them. But rock throwing at others' views while you say nothing is pathetic.
Steve: You I'm surprised at. I don't think I need to say anything more on that point.
Desirelines was much more eloquent - our posts must have passed in cyberspace. While I was tempted to delete this post once I read his, I shall leave it where it is as a simpler way of saying the same thing. At least it won't require much intelligence or thought for lazy thinkers to understand.
|
Edited by - Thoughtscape on 21 March 2007 10:28:08 |
|
|
|
Simon
Junior Member
United Kingdom
283 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 10:33:48
|
quote:
the majority of other posters in this debate so far
I actually wrote that it was "in the whole of this forum". But maybe I shouldn't have put that in...as really it's off topic...though I stand by the point.
quote:
smacks only of the desperation of those unable to produce a counter argument.
I am quite happy to counter your "argument". But how petty do we want to get?
quote:
however melodramatic it may sound, website creation is creative
I agree- why do you think I mentioned writing and music?
quote:
If we credit the site host, do we then credit the internet connection that made it possible, or the computer on which we designed the site?
No. But why do we credit a publisher of a book? Is that not a valid point?
And by the way, there are some publishers that I avoid because I know what I'm getting with their books. (That refers to another posting somewhere round here that I couldn't find to quote from)
Simon from
www.myexperienceof.net |
Edited by - Simon on 21 March 2007 10:35:37 |
|
|
|
DESIRELINESCO.UK
New Member
United Kingdom
86 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 11:04:02
|
Hi all (again!),
I dont think we should get at all petty- if you are unable to contribute to a discussion without descending into pettiness that, without wanting to sound irritable, is your problem.
It is true that you wrote "in the whole forum", but the inference of the statement was clear. You chose to mention it in this debate as you felt (wrongly, I believe) it was this thread that exhibited it most obviously. To fall back on that point now is similar to the person who, having said something hurtful or nasty during an argument, then claims they were only joking- an easy way out completely transparent in its insincerity.
Your point about publishers is valid, but, as is part of any discussion, I feel that it was countered more than successfully by other posts. If you feel it wasn't, then now is your opportunity to explain why- not to simply undermine other posts and then restate your position.
r
Desire Lines:
Belfast based fine art photography and design.
www.desirelines.co.uk |
|
|
|
Simon
Junior Member
United Kingdom
283 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 11:47:14
|
quote:
without descending into pettiness that, without wanting to sound irritable, is your problem.
"pettiness" means looking at little things - as opposed to an overview. It is about taking an argument apart tiny bit by tiny bit. And I think that, even (especially?) by mentioning it, you do sound irritable.
quote:
the inference of the statement was clear. You chose to mention it in this debate as you felt (wrongly, I believe) it was this thread that exhibited it most obviously.
Wrong again. I mentioned it here (and I openly accepted it was off-topic) because my concerns and frustration had been building up...camel's back and straw springs to mind. I did write about it being since about Christmas time.
What makes you think you can tell what makes me choose to write things?
Perhaps I could counter with
quote:
the inference of the statement was clear
and write...."only to someone who is feeling they have lost the argument/is paranoid" etc etc (AND, by the way...I don't actually believe that!)
It is possible to raise and discuss points within a debate without having to believe them completely...a case of "throw it into the pond and see what happens". Debate and argument is best experienced as a dance, rather than a battle.
Simon from
www.myexperienceof.net |
Edited by - Simon on 21 March 2007 14:17:58 |
|
|
|
discostars
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1666 Posts |
|
|
Simon
Junior Member
United Kingdom
283 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 15:01:55
|
I'm talking about the "Created by" which sits alongside our own sitename and copyright symbol. The little, insignificant, hardly- able-to-see-it one! 
Seriously though...going back to the notion of wish list- would a compromise be to only have the footer on the front/home page of the site? Would this necessitate only one page being "doctored" by those who do not want it?
Simon from
www.myexperienceof.net |
Edited by - Simon on 21 March 2007 15:09:22 |
|
|
|
Shagrat
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1078 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 15:20:24
|
The Banner version is an affiliate link Steve, it is optional and up to individuals if they want to show it and maybe earn a few pounds from it.
This debate is about the "created at Mr site" link. that sits at the bottom line of each page of our sites.
If you like it or don't mind it being there that is fine.
If you don't like it or would like to be able to remove it with an easy on/off option that is also fine too.
This is a Debate, it is to find out peoples opinions on the matter, so everybody's opinions count.
But lets keep it as light hearted as possible, after all its not a BIG problem or issue its just a very small part of the MR Site "experience" 
If there is a very large amount of dislike for it then maybe MR site will give us the option to remove it without having to type in code to each page, each time we re-publish.
If only a small minority dislike it then it will probably stay. and we can still use our own code to remove it.
Shagrat
Latest Venture.
www.londontheatrejobs.com
Ye very oldy Home page.
www.callnetuk.com/home/shagrat/
Alternative MR Site Forum
http://mrsitemembers.proboards79.com
Do you Blog?
http://shagrat-webtips.blogspot.com/
Need Some Help with MR Site?
Want to know How to Submit your Website to Search Engines?
http://www.callnetuk.com/home/shagrat/ms/ |
|
|
|
discostars
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1666 Posts |
|
|
DESIRELINESCO.UK
New Member
United Kingdom
86 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 15:47:16
|
Hello Simon (and all...once again!),
Without wanting to throw more fuel on the almost farcical fire this debate has become, I feel I cannot leave some of the raised points unanswered.
Firstly, simon, you said that you could happily counter my arguements, but only if you resorted to pettiness- I was merely responding that I don't think we should have to resort to pettiness of any sort during an adult debate. So it was you, and not I, that brought up the subject of being petty first. And, thankyou for your explanation, but I am more than fully aware of what "pettiness" means in this (and any) context.
Secondly, saying that this thread was "the straw that broke the camel's back" regarding your opinion of forum users exhibiting lazy thinking, only reinforces what I said in my original response. You obviously think that lazy thinking and a, somehow, deteriorated debating skill has been exhibited in this thread, and so your retraction by claiming you were refering to the forum as a whole is, in my opinion, worthless. Put simply, whether refering the whole forum, or this thread it particular, you chose this instance to bring your feelings to our attention, because it was this instance that you deemed the most worthy of criticism.
Thirdly, whether you believe it or not (and I am more than fully aware of the concept of playing devil's advocate) I don't believe I have lost any argument, as I was unaware we were having one- raising arguments and counter-arguements are very different from actually having an argument- as i am sure you would agree.
Finally, if you truly believe that debate is best experienced as a dance, why, then, did you resort so early to disecting posts line by line and demeaning the views of others without actually bringing anything more to the party. Your rather faecetious remark about "little, insignificant...(footer)" is a comment that certainly falls within this remit, as it completely undermines the views of others without any real authority. Insignificance is an entirely subjective concept, as, again, i'm sure you would agree.
I would concede, though, that a footer only on the front page could be seen as a kind of compromise, but one that doesn't really address the issues brought about earlier regarding the perceived professionalism of certain sites in very particular areas of business. I think really, though, that one of the points of this debate was to discuss a compromise that didn't involve any kind of "doctoring". If we must resort to doctoring anyway, then what would be the point?
r
Desire Lines:
Belfast based fine art photography and design.
www.desirelines.co.uk |
|
|
|
Thoughtscape
Average Member
Australia
538 Posts |
Posted - 21 March 2007 : 21:30:53
|
There's little I can add to what is a very well constructed and thought out post. Except to say that as someone whose scholarship through University was for debate, each of your recent posts exemplifies some of the best elements of the art form. As opposed to comments like:
* I disagree; and
* people around here are lazy (paraphrased)
which not only are discounted as a matter of course in debates, but add nothing to what was, prior to that, a stimulating and interesting discussion of the issues. I include Simon's first post in that comment, so it's puzzling why it degenerated so quickly.
The fundamental issue is clearly whether or not crediting Mr Site falls within the ambit of generally accepted website acknowledgements. And I'd say that for those who use a pro forma template with no customisation, there's an argument that Mr Site is essentially the site designer (for all intents and purposes - let's not get too technical about whether it's them or the product they purchased and customised, or we truly get into the realm of the ridiculous).
But where Mr Site is used simply for its core construction (ie technical) elements and the creative elements are completely designed buy the site owner, then crediting Mr Site becomes a fuzzier question. For those who simply use Mr Site as a host, there's no question - it is neither common nor best practice to credit a site host. And in that instance it would be absolutely analogous to question whether that would also require you to credit Canon for the camera used to take the photos on the site, as it's the distinction between the technology and the person who uses the technology to create a unique result.
In closing, I would not agree that putting the credit on the home page is any kind of compromise. As I and others said very early on in the debate, and Desirelines reiterated below, that does not deal with the credibility issue. Nor does it deal with the fact that "created at Mr Site" actually comes up in search results, which is entirely inappropriate (see my Google results for Thoughtscape - it has one line of my site results and one line of "created at Mr Site"). Mr Site can't fix it, and Google contacts tell me that it's Mr Site's problem. Whether it is or it isn't, if the footer wasn't there, it wouldn't be an issue.
S.
www.thoughtscape.com.au
Communication Strategy Consultants
...and our other site
www.jazzopoly.com.au
Cool Jazz/Sophisticated Swing |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
MR Site footer Debate.
