OT: Why Web Pages Get Sh*tty to Read

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - OT: Why Web Pages Get Sh*tty to Read

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

D from BC
Guest

Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:43 pm

Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'
It's not due to a crappy writer making the website. It's someone writing
with use of SEO (search engine optimization) to make the website rank
high.

The writing on the web site is bloated with keywords, word stemming
(potting, pots, potter,pottery,potted), ridiculous use of synonyms,
tautology is used(method to bloat with keywords), deliberate wordiness
(method to bloat with keywords) and use of alternate sentence structure
(ex. Pottery in Amazon is amazing. Amazon's pottery is amazing. The 1st
one can rank better.)

And that's why most web pages are shitty to read.
Web pages are designed to be ranked, not to be read.
Google's ranker(Not AI yet.) is now responsible for causing a decline in
the efficient readiblity on web pages.

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

--
D from BC
British Columbia

D Yuniskis
Guest

Sun Mar 07, 2010 10:01 pm

D from BC wrote:

Quote:

Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'

[snip]

Quote:

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

And this is *news*?? :>

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)

Even something as simple as counting images, '$' characters, etc.

D from BC
Guest

Sun Mar 07, 2010 10:19 pm

In article <hn13h9$irf$1_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

Quote:

D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'

[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

And this is *news*?? :

It might be to some.

Quote:

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)

I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Jim Thompson
Guest

Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:08 pm

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:19:42 -0800, D from BC <myrealaddress_at_comic.com>
wrote:

Quote:

In article <hn13h9$irf$1_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'

[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

And this is *news*?? :

It might be to some.

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)

I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Check out www.rasushi.com

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled Wink

D from BC
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:02 am

In article <is88p5d8fpg7m3r6qopd1q4lra6o6lgl7r_at_4ax.com>, To-Email-Use-
The-Envelope-Icon_at_My-Web-Site.com says...

Quote:

Check out www.rasushi.com

Looks ok..
Looks a bit better on my high end monitor.
Site seems functional.

amdx
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:56 am

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon_at_My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:is88p5d8fpg7m3r6qopd1q4lra6o6lgl7r_at_4ax.com...

Quote:

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:19:42 -0800, D from BC <myrealaddress_at_comic.com
wrote:

In article <hn13h9$irf$1_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting
anything
from this sh*t.'

[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

And this is *news*?? :

It might be to some.

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)

I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Check out www.rasushi.com

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled ;-)

...Jim Thompson

That's not hard to read, years ago I saw a joke site that had a
silver/grey
diamond plate background with white letters. Very difficult to read, I
had to copy and paste it in to Word to read it. I sent an email to the
author,
telling him how hard it was to read and he should change it. He sent me
the page in an email, I sent it back to him telling him I didn't need it, I
already figured out how to make it readable.
Don't know if he found that humorous.
Mike

mpm
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:31 am

On Mar 7, 5:08 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-Web-
Site.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:19:42 -0800, D from BC <myrealaddr...@comic.com
wrote:

In article <hn13h9$ir...@speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to...@seen.com
says...

D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'

[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah

And this is *news*?? :

It might be to some.

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)

I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Check outwww.rasushi.com

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon athttp://www.analog-innovations.com| 1962 |

The only thing bipartisan in this country is hypocrisy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What about those commercials on TV?
The ones with mouse print.

I saw one the other day that was white text (approaching a 2-point
cartoon-type font) on a pale blue sky with light grayish-white clouds.
Almost zero contrast. I am not kidding!!

Plus it was on-screen for all of 2 seconds and contained probably a
half-dozen sentences.
Even if you could see it, you couldn't speed-read it.

I try to make it a point to NEVER purchase stuff that's advertised in
this way.
Hopefully, someday, vendors will get the message and STOP doing that
crap.
But's that usually pretty difficult with auto dealers - who seem to be
the worst offenders.

-mpm

D Yuniskis
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:11 am

Jim Thompson wrote:

Quote:

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:19:42 -0800, D from BC <myrealaddress_at_comic.com
wrote:

In article <hn13h9$irf$1_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...
D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'
[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah
And this is *news*?? :
It might be to some.

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)
I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Check out www.rasushi.com

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled Wink

I think blue on orange is the deal breaker (if I have
remembered that correctly). Your eyes focus on the
two colors at different depths so the image "vibrates".

D from BC
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:13 am

In article <hn1p69$jj3$2_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

Quote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 13:19:42 -0800, D from BC <myrealaddress_at_comic.com
wrote:

In article <hn13h9$irf$1_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...
D from BC wrote:
Ever wonder why some web pages are written on the quirky side, seem
superficial or raise the question 'I'm reading but not getting anything
from this sh*t.'
[snip]

Web pages are getting like this...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah...USEFUL CONTENT..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah lah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah
And this is *news*?? :
It might be to some.

I think you have to lump web sites into two loose categories:
commercial and non-commercial. The latter can be subdivided into
"fluff" (e.g., "How I spent my summer vacation") and informative.

The latter *tend* to be the ones I look for. The commercial
sites are easy for me to spot -- lots of graphic content -- and
largely ineffective for me (I browse with pictures, flash, etc.
disabled). Too bad search engines don't *really* act in the
user's best interest and *score* the site! (commercial, etc.)
I like to navigate commercial web sites by looking at graphics because
the English is too watered down by SEO. iows... I try not to read. The
reading value is made deficient by redundancy and tautology used to
increase ranking. Pictures become more effective to me when the English
is made less effective by SEO.
'A picture is worth a thousand words.'
My spin on that is..
'A picture is worth a million words when SEO is applied.'

Check out www.rasushi.com

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled ;-)

I think blue on orange is the deal breaker (if I have
remembered that correctly). Your eyes focus on the
two colors at different depths so the image "vibrates".

lol

D Yuniskis
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:05 am

D from BC wrote:

Quote:

In article <hn1p69$jj3$2_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

[snip]

Quote:

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled Wink

I think blue on orange is the deal breaker (if I have
remembered that correctly). Your eyes focus on the
two colors at different depths so the image "vibrates".

lol Smile

It's funny to watch the discomfort it causes *others*.

But, *very* disturbing when *you* are the one trying to read
(or even *view*!) stuff like this. If forced to do so for
any amount of time (i.e., even a few minutes) you will
probably end up with a mild headache or feeling of nausea.

I'm surprised MS doesn't use this color scheme for their
warranty notices...

D from BC
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:06 am

In article <hn1sb6$n32$2_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

Quote:

D from BC wrote:
In article <hn1p69$jj3$2_at_speranza.aioe.org>, not.going.to.be_at_seen.com
says...

[snip]

Anyone that puts red text on black should be pick-em-up-hauled Wink

I think blue on orange is the deal breaker (if I have
remembered that correctly). Your eyes focus on the
two colors at different depths so the image "vibrates".

lol :)

It's funny to watch the discomfort it causes *others*.

But, *very* disturbing when *you* are the one trying to read
(or even *view*!) stuff like this. If forced to do so for
any amount of time (i.e., even a few minutes) you will
probably end up with a mild headache or feeling of nausea.

I'm surprised MS doesn't use this color scheme for their
warranty notices...

I'm wondering if there's an evolutionary explaination.

Fred Abse
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:44 am

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:08:41 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Quote:

Check out www.rasushi.com

All I get is "Click here to download plugin"

Goddamn Flash.

I hope the food is better than the website :-)

--
"Electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference
is, I presume, that one comes a little more expensive, but is more
durable; the other is a cheaper thing, but the moths get into it."
(Stephen Leacock)

Tim Watts
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:57 am

Fred Abse <excretatauris_at_invalid.invalid>
wibbled on Monday 08 March 2010 09:44

Quote:

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:08:41 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Check out www.rasushi.com

All I get is "Click here to download plugin"

Goddamn Flash.

I hope the food is better than the website :-)

Anyone who does a whole "website" in flash is missing the point and should
be hung, drawn and quartered by Tim Berners-Lee and the parts displayed as a
warning to others.

--
Tim Watts

Managers, politicians and environmentalists: Nature's carbon buffer.

pimpom
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:46 pm

Tim Watts wrote:

Quote:

Anyone who does a whole "website" in flash is missing the point
and
should be hung, drawn and quartered by Tim Berners-Lee and the
parts
displayed as a warning to others.

Amen. Re colors, so far I've never needed the contents of a
particular site so badly that I have to force myself to bear the
torture of reading tiny red fonts on black, dark grey on black,
white on light grey, etc. When I encounter such web pages, I
close them in silent protest and look for alternative sources. I
also feel that anyone who puts up such a website is probably not
a reliable source of information anyway.

Jim Thompson
Guest

Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:28 pm

On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:44:33 -0800, Fred Abse
<excretatauris_at_invalid.invalid> wrote:

Quote:

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:08:41 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Check out www.rasushi.com

All I get is "Click here to download plugin"

Goddamn Flash.

I hope the food is better than the website Smile

Fabulous.

I was looking at the website for the first time, because I wanted
take-out... the wife is immobile at the moment due to her nasty fall
:-(

There's no way to order take-out on the page :-(

So I went in, ordered take-out, and gave 'em hell for no such
provision on the website AND the red-on-black text Smile

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronics Design - OT: Why Web Pages Get Sh*tty to Read