Forum Moderators: open
Score 1 point for new hipster
Running score: K 1, B 0
**********
Brand K: Main color scheme -Blue on blue
Brand G: Main color scheme - Blue on gray
Score no point for either. Do we need a Cuban to run before we'll see living colors?
**********
Brand B & K: Old Glory right up there in the website name, top left.
Brand B: Adds a second Old Glory at bottom left.
B scores 1 extra flag waving point.
Running score: B 1, K 1
**********
Brand B: Header - The B member of the team is in a larger font and sits squarely on top of the veep.
Brand K: Header - Prezhopeful and veep sit side by side, equal sized font.
Brand K scores 1 humility point.
Running score: B 1, K 2
**********
Brand B&K: Blogus Populi right up top;
No added points. Everybody has a blog these days.
**********
Brand B: meta name=keywords? approximately 100
Brand K: meta name=keywords? about 6
Brand B: Deduct 1/4 point for keywords stuffing; Add 1/4 point for keyword stuffing
No added points for either Brand, maybe.
***********
Brand K: Main table: <table width=767>
Brand B: <TABLE width="775">
Brand B wins 1/4 point for table vanity, having to be just 'a little bit bigger'.
Running score: B 1&1/4 K 2
***********
Images - Brand B: B shaking hands with the folks
Images - Brand K: Is K giving us the thumbs-up sign or making a fist? Ambiguous.
Add 1/4 point for Brand B for at least conforming to the norm.
Deduct 1/4 from Brand K for not making it clear: Is he our friend or is he showing his resolve by making some sort of fist?
Running score: B 1&1/2 K 1&3/4
***********
Brand B: Hardhats on homepage
Brand K: Michael J. Fox on homepage
No added points. Images are a tie, though the hardhats is a bit of a stretch (unless they're guys working for Halliburton?)
***********
So, let us debate the merits of the political websites.
Ground rules: No statements regarding policy, unless humorously stated in the context of how the website evidences 'policy' (stated in only the most obtuse or oxymoronic way)
No blatant voting. Analysis must focus on the website design, etc. not the content (Unless, for instance, you want to count the number of typos you can find or the one that has a sentence somewhere that's just a major gaff or an image that has something just a bit off in it. Dig out those magnifying glasses.)
No discussion whatsoever about the real issues. We don't do that here, which makes us just like the politicians.
There question is: Which website wins the website election and why?
Feel free to keep a running score and add or deduct points as you see fit, but kinda stay within bounds. I started at 1 point +/- and then realized 1/4 point additions might be better SOOOOOO maybe 1 point max for any one issue with range per issue from 1/4 to 1/2 to 3/4 to 1. (Did I get that right?)
Have at it, but keep it apolitical.
Backlinks
Yahoo
Brand B: 18,100
Brand K: 11,500
ATW
Brand B: 18,200
Brand K: 3,880
G
Brand B: 10,600
Brand K: 20,300
**push on backlinks, -1 for K for having links from a ketchup website
PR
Brand B: 7
Brand K: 7
**push
Brand K: #2
Brand B: #3
And I thought Brand G had a conservative bias ;-)
The algorithm gods have voted! So mote it be! Brand K comes out on top.
(Of course, we all know how permanent rankings can be.)
Brand K appears to be the answer...
Syzygy
Note: all tests done on "Home" pages only.
W3C Tests for Standards Compliance:
B & K: both fail their stated DocType 4.01 Transitional: some things silly like a css link with an xhtml closing, also a mixture of external css and old-style inline table attributes (not styles), and tables, tables everywhere ...
I spent as little time as possible looking at both code sets. Uck.
homokaasu.org/gematriculator/ Test for Good & Evil:
B: 21% evil, 79% good
K: 47% evil, 53% good
Being 100% ambivalent I have no comment.
Neither site is built in "relative space", both use absolute values for width. Which means the sites won't resize depending on screen resolution. -1 point for both.
Fatitude:
At 1024x768, Brand K fits nicely in browser window even with sidebar open (a very typical setup with the "favorites" or "search" open in sidebar). Brand B only fits in browser window on a 1024x768 screen if no sidebar is open. +1 for Brand K.
On a 800x600 resolution setting (common - look at your traffic statistics folks, we're talking 30-40% of web traffic), Brand K breaks even - won't fit on the screen with sidebar, will fit on screen with sidebar closed. Brand B, -1 point. Won't fit on the screen no matter what, necessitating the dreaded horizontal scroll.
Splash Page:
If you have a link that says "skip intro," or "skip registration" or "skip whatever" to get to the main site, follow your own advice and SKIP THE SPLASH PAGE! -1 point for Brand K
Guide Me There, Don't Grab My Eyes, Yank Them Out of My Head, and Drag Me There
Brand K, nice clean layout (after useless splash page), leads the eye to explore around and find interesting information. Brand B - Blinky-moving things, distracting pictures, jumbled, chaotic layout (at first glance), spam-lord design theme. Point to Brand K. (spam-lords, feel free to reverse that and give point to Brand B).
Random Act of Kindness Award
Brand B gets a bonus point for having graphic links to American Red Cross and Florida Hurricane Relief Fund.
Total:
Brand K: 0
Brand B: -1
(Spam-Lord factor, Brand K: -1. Brand B: 0 )
Neither site is built in "relative space", both use absolute values for width. Which means the sites won't resize depending on screen resolution. -1 point for both.
From Brand B this is to be expected. Brand B does not want you and your browser deciding how wide Brand B's site looks. Brand B will decide for you how wide Brand B's site is because Brand B knows better than you how wide you want Brand B's site to be. In fact, everybody should check their machines for a trojan horse that lets Brand B decide how wide ALL web sites we view are...
From Brand K, this is surprising. Setting a pixel width cements that width at one setting, removing the possibility of flip-flopping between a 700px wide and a 900px wide page view...
As for points awarded on pure design as related to this absolute width issue...I say one point for each. Relative width pages lose all aesthetic sense in a maxed browser at 1024X800 res.
Total CSS File Size Neither makes good, consistent use of shorthand css. K's in particular suffers several improper 'background' shorthand declarations.
Brand K: 18.1kb - points: 0
Brand B: 8.0 kb - points: 1
Validation No loss, no gain
Brand K: 2 Errors, 1 Warning - points: 0
Brand B: 7 Errors, 1 Warning - points: 0
In-Line Font Tags index page
Brand K: 1 - points: 1
Brand B: 40 - points: -1 negates gain for file size
Brand B.com 18131
Brank K.com 45820
Of course, I never know why people go to search engines and then type in website domain names with extension. What does it mean that people do that?
What does that mean for Brand K?
Or maybe it's that 99% of the browsing public doesn't know that you CAN just type stuff into the addy bar....
Search Term: PresidentBrand K: #2
Brand B: #3
Almighty Google has spokenth!
Almighty Google has spokenth!
Google has a lisp?
Brand B has an affiliate program:-
[webmasterworld.com...]
... and is therefore utilising SEM as a means of generating revenue. That's worth a point.
TJ
2 points to be deducted for misunderstanding of aff. concepts.
Obviously no Brand B webmaster is a member of WW...
TJ
Obviously no Brand B webmaster is a member of WW
In relation to webmasters of both "sides" ...
Suggest you check up on those from whom we aint heard from here in a while TJ... ;)
( 'n you a lawyer "n" all .."lack of evidence is in itself evidence" )...
PS ..find me the origin of the quote ..win a carrot!
find me the origin of the quote
Can't remember now, but people also go on holiday you know.... ;-)
TJ
:)
