[Imc-dc-editorial] Concern over small size of important promotion/Direct response
old school
seizetv at yahoo.com
Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:50:07 -0800 (PST)
i have no problem with redesign for legibility.
it's great that a redesign is possible, or in the
works. we are not all good at design, and/or not all
great at promotions/fundraising.
BUT People on editorial have legit differences in
priorities, which some might like to frame in pixel
size and real estate on our web site, or pose as
"fundraising" vs "integrated design".
This is not how i would pose this. I would pose this
as "collaboration" and "respect" for each other's
different priorities. I am not the first person who
raised this issue of design, clutter, distraction,
shoving down from visibility of other projects, nor is
this the first time it has been raised. (more like the
12th or 13th time.)
We don't agree. We have to "respect" each other's
disagreements. this particular design is the second
rework, done without consultation.
the priority issue to me is learning how to respect
each other in a collaborative way, so as not to step
on the toes of people who asked that graphics not take
over the site, and asked many times.
In case you're interested in my personal preference -
I like chaos - in design too. My priority is
relevancy".
--- Alan Bushnell <bushnell@cs.oberlin.edu> wrote:
> I think it would have been better for Joanie to
> consult with Rupert
> about her concerns before resizing the image. Then
> her point about
> focus could have been addressed by Rupert making a
> smaller yet still
> readable image (which he seems willing to do).
> Making the image
> unreadable and informing Rupert (rather than
> discussing with him) when
> it will be allowed to be displayed prominently after
> he has asked what
> is up is not the best outcome.
>
> Joanie, do you have any concerns about Rupert's
> offer to make a smaller
> image?
>
> Of course, it may be helpful to state the obvious,
> that the real problem
> is that we don't have a good concept of design for
> the site. The result
> is people move stuff and stick stuff in random
> places.
>
> alan
>
> On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 17:05, old school wrote:
> > I'm the one who made it smaller.
> >
> > I believe in helping our web site viewers Focus on
> > what we think is important, and not get
> overwhelmed by
> > our tendency to fill every corner with "eye
> candy", or
> > what others have called a not well integrated
> design
> > or too much distraction, etc etc.
> >
> > Next week, that graphic will get bigger again.
> BUT we
> > are in war, and I think we should direct attention
> to
> > our breaking news, the thing we are busting our
> ass to
> > keep going.
> >
> > The graphic is still there. It is just not as
> > important as war. This is also my reply to the
> > thoughtful letter we received from Bork re the
> stories
> > we cover. This is not an arguement for one topic
> to
> > the exclusion of everything else. But what we
> think is
> > important is totally obvious.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- "D. N. Russo" <dnrusso@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > hey folks
> > > in an effort to PROMOTE the really BIG event at
> Cada
> > > Vez next Thursday with
> > > the author talk and book signing, I'd like to
> ask
> > > that the graphic on the
> > > sidebar be increased back to the original
> intended
> > > size. It's a promotion,
> > > and it needs to be BIG to amplify its
> importance. I
> > > can't even read it on
> > > my screen because of the way it's been resized
> it
> > > with HTML. It makes the
> > > graphic pixellated. It may look fine on some
> > > computers, but the proper way
> > > to handle the issue is to change the graphic
> itself,
> > > and not use HTML width
> > > code.
> > >
> > > I'm really ready to lobby very hard for this,
> > > because the producers of this
> > > event want to see the website used well to
> promote
> > > it, and currently it
> > > appears to be relegated to some standardized
> size to
> > > fit some criteria that
> > > are unclear. I mean, isn't this supposed to be a
> > > HUGE looking event on our
> > > website??
> > >
> > > If you could tell me the HEIGHT restrictions in
> > > pixels that the editorial
> > > group has decided to put on these promotional
> > > graphics, I'll change the
> > > graphic to fit that and expand the width to use
> of
> > > the wasted space
> > > currently resulting from the resize.
> > >
> > > i'm not complaining, i don't want to sound that
> way.
> > > i'm trying to PROMOTE.
> > > i'm trying to make readers know how important
> this
> > > event is, to raise as
> > > much money for the IMC as possible and i feel
> the
> > > current treatment is
> > > acting as a handicap. what does the promotions
> > > department need to do to
> > > convince the editorial department that they
> should
> > > devote a lot of space to
> > > promote DC-IMC fundraisers?
> > >
> > > thanks for helping resolve it. i respect the
> > > standards or whatever you're
> > > all operating on, so i raise this issue like
> this.
> > >
> > > i end with a proposal that the event also be
> > > promoted on some other part of
> > > the real estate of the website. HYPE, folks,
> HYPE.
> > > peace
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Imc-dc-editorial mailing list
> > > Imc-dc-editorial@lists.indymedia.org
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-dc-editorial
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness,
> live on your desktop!
> > http://platinum.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imc-dc-editorial mailing list
> > Imc-dc-editorial@lists.indymedia.org
> >
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-dc-editorial
> --
> http://demandmedia.net/
> Collaborative Video Blog
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com