the    sides

14 responses so far ↓

• 1 Wayne // May 16, 2005 at 4:01 pm

  No…change is bad. Do not change it. You are likely to loose 2 of your 4 readers.

• 2 Grant // May 16, 2005 at 4:31 pm

  spoken like a true pessimistic, engineer…

  and I will never lose my mom as a reader…or amy. or you. so see, I’ll only lose one…

• 3 rob // May 16, 2005 at 6:36 pm

  Honestly, I like them both. But the test one will not give you as much flex because your content column is fixed narrow. I think it can work.

  Heck, most of the time I read your text RSS feed anyway!

• 4 Nelson // May 16, 2005 at 7:30 pm

  I say don’t change it. I’m a fan of clean, easily viewed pages. When you add the left-hand column, it gets cluttery. Keep the 2 column format…in my opinion. And we all know you’re a people pleaser! (insert guffah here)

• 5 Barry // May 16, 2005 at 8:56 pm

  I personally like the original template better. But it’s pretty much up to you. You COULD just change it for a trial period and see what comes of it, but I think sticking to the original is your best bet. (Unless there are many complaints about navigating your site, then I would go for change.) My $0.02, I’m just your brother.

• 6 Grant // May 16, 2005 at 9:31 pm

  First of all - thanks to my brother for throwing his pennies in on the matter…how cool is that???

  btw - he’s like some computer guru/czar/stud. His 2 cents is more like a life savings for me.

  2nd of all - I hate to think of the time I spent getting the 3 columns to look like and not use it…

  but I do think the 2 columns is a ‘cleaner’ look.

  still noodlin’ it.

• 7 Barry // May 16, 2005 at 9:51 pm

  More pennies comin’ your way! Let me ask you a question, when you are taking strides to steer someone to God, you are pretty straightforward and clear about things are you not? In other words, you try not to confuse that person otherwise they may lose interest for the wrong reasons.

  That said, the same principle applies to webpages in that they need to be simple, straightforward, and get to the meat within the first 5 seconds that a new viewer sees them. While I applaud your dedication to spending your time working hard on the 3 column look, it appears to be a bit “too busy” and just a lot to look at initially. Remember, a good webpage may only be a few words in cyberspace, but it can speak to millions and produce the desired effect with minimal effort.

  Sorry this was so long, if you finished reading it, thanks!

• 8 Nelson // May 16, 2005 at 10:21 pm

  Wow…I must say: that’s the first time I’ve ever heard/read someone parallel someone’s approach to ministry to web design. You MUST be a computer guru/czar/stud to pull that kind of analogy out!

  Nicely done!

• 9 Wayne // May 17, 2005 at 9:00 am

  Your public has spoken…do not change. Again, change for the sake of change is bad. You must have solid reasons for changing. A thorough cost/benefit analysis must be performed. Then a quantitative study on the human/web interface must be performed with at least 10,000 subjects and a control group. Then a space/font variation analysis performed. If results so indicate a change is good, then do so…but whatever you do, do not go on feeling.

• 10 jlo // May 17, 2005 at 10:35 am

  I kind of liked your “old, old” design. Just thought I would throw that in for kickers.

• 11 Buggy-Buggy // May 17, 2005 at 4:08 pm

  OK - I like the 3-col look because I don’t have to scroll down thru the page to see info - for me more info at a glance is better.

  With that said, K.I.S.S., I think you know where I’m going with this.

  Your brother is right - a little can say a lot. It’s like sharing the gospel, share it and talk if you have to. Not only do we need to know what to include and where to put it, but to know what to leave out.

  Then again, you can always test drive it a while and see what happens.

• 12 Jerry // May 18, 2005 at 7:33 am

  Simple is better, but change is good.

  If you don’t change, you can’t learn.

• 13 The Misfit // May 18, 2005 at 7:47 am

  Besides, any change will have to be approved by the membership at a regular called business meeting, one which you have advertised for no less than two weeks prior to said meeting, as ammended in the by-laws section 8B. Also, any motion brought before confernce must either be brought from a standing committee, or in written form submitted to the resolution committee no less than 2 days prior to said business conference. Depending on the nature of the proposed change, the denominational headquarters may need to be brought in to consult.

• 14 Jedi Master Yoda // May 18, 2005 at 3:57 pm

  “Change for better is good, change for change, hmmmm… neither good, neither bad, just change. For change to be good, make things better, it must”

Leave a Comment