performers.net forums  

Go Back   performers.net forums > GENERAL DISCUSSIONS... > PROMO STUFF (MARKETING, MEDIA, ETC.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-27-05, 05:50 PM   #21
Rachel Peters
Moderator
 
Rachel Peters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto/Hamilton
Posts: 1,396
Default Re: Why?

[quote]Originally posted by martin ewen
[b]I made my site in the late nineties.
It's a rambling mess of content cul de sacs.
Its ego driven rather than market driven and that's its disadvantage and to a small number of weird clients, an advantage. (overall it sucks)
i wouldn't use it as an example of design because as far as I can see it lacks it.

I was reading, and was going to write a big response to this, but then scrolled up a few. I think Taxi Trix said it well. I know that it pulled me in kept me there for quite a while. Far longer than any shiny, trendy, flashy performer site I can think of. Not because of the Labyrinth of hyperlinks, but its content. I got sucked into your stories. I got behind in quota at that job I used to go to because of your stories. What it may lack in design it more than makes up for in content, in humour, in brain, in art, in you.
A well designed site (or anything) without substance gets boring REAL fast. Something with plenty of substance, but less than perfect design... well, that could be the Simpsons, or King of the Hill, or Homestarrunner, or any number of animated Oscar winners who couldn't draw worth beans (Sorry. Everything in life seems to be a metaphor for animation to me. get used to it). But heck, it could even be that funny, paraplegic guy I had a crush on in college. Content overcomes image. It always comes down to content. ...unless either someone is so shallow they can't see past the shiny lights, or the content is wrapped in something so extremely ugly that it makes your eyes bleed, content should win.
...but of course content wrapped in shiny lights would be ideal, I suppose.
I think I'm just trying to say, you've the far more important of the two, in heaps.
(and my eyes never bled once.)

Um.... yeah.
Enough?
Enough.

Last edited by Rachel Peters; 02-21-08 at 09:46 AM.
Rachel Peters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-07, 06:24 AM   #22
Doctor Eric
Senior Member
 
Doctor Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Inner Bowels of Roseanne Arnold
Posts: 955
Default

I rather like ericcash.net

I've now realized that I care about fans, not bookers.
__________________
?!*@!!*%?!!?@!$#%!?*?!?!

!?www.ericcash.com?!
Doctor Eric is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.