attitudes in HWG critique.

I just can't believe you people. I can't believe that you agree that
insults are fair game in a site that's supposed to offer support for people
who have questions or insecurities. If I'm asking for a review for a site,
it's because I'm not 100% confident that it's good. And then there are
people like Killian who rather than tell me, politely, that my site needs a
major overhaul, will dump their frustrations on me and call me names and
insult my religion, just because they felt that my average-quality size
should not even be worth a polite critique because their site is just so
damned awesome. Well, I'm sorry, but Killian was not born knowing anything
and obviously learned how to do things along the way, just like all of us
have and still are. 

NO ONE said anything about going "nice site" and that's it. I don't do
that; if I see something I don't like, I'll tell ya (and I usually point
out quite a few things). And there are always things that can be improved,
even in all-mighty, all-so-damned-cool Killian's site. SO WHAT if my site
ain't the best of the best? THAT IS WHY I'm in HWG-Critique, so that I can
get feedback and try to make it better than it was yesterday. NOT so that
my insecurities regarding web design can be abused, and my confidence and
well being shattered by some moron who has nothing better to do. 

There are ways and ways of doing a review. Killian could have pointed out
the same things he did, but without making Starr Wolf feel as some
worthless little girl who would do better if she played with her dolls.
Killian's response wasn't direct, it was insulting. One thing is to say
"fix this,this or that" and another thing is to insult one's views,
intelligence or anything else that may make one feel like crap. It is wrong
for all of us to stand here and let people like Killian abuse every
newcomer, or everyone that maybe thinks they are good but really aren't. NO
ONE has the right to say "your site sucks, you suck, you're an idiot"...
what should be said, rather, is "this is what I don't like about your site,
this is what you can do to improve it"... at least, that was what I always
thought HWG-Critique was all about.  

If no one shows any sign of being above Killian's level of maturity and
ethics, I will remove myself from this list. I'd rather live with a
bad-looking site than with Killian's uncalled-for personal remarks.

VERY VERY Sincerely,

-Nathalie Esteban
UCLA Medieval Studies Student and VERY part-time web designer.

At 11:57 AM 12/31/98 -0500, you wrote:
>At 11:43 PM 12/30/98 -0800, Nathalie Esteban wrote:
>>I second Ms. Welch's opinion. This list is meant to add constructive
>>criticism, not negativity. If you don't want to help and be helped, then
>>take a hike.
>>
>
>Killian's post was raw.. But direct.. If you read it carefully you'll
>realize, while unbelievably flamatory, none of it was a personal jab with
>out reason.. Since then we've seen 'industry experts' posting reasons that
>Killian is an ass, we've seen people actually comment that 'you can never
>write too much' when it comes to the unbelievable verbose and
>non-directional text on the Starr site, and we're looking at a rapidly
>degrading thread here..
>
>Lets simply think of it like this.... Killian's an ass.. ok... but he's OUR
>ass... better him telling you your site sucks than a client...


P.S. He may be YOUR ass, but I refuse to let him be mine. 


Live not as though there were a thousand years ahead of you. Fate is at
your elbow; make yourself good while life and power are still yours.

-Marcus Aurelius, 2nd. Century A.D.

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA