Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Antsan]

[Edit]forget it[/Edit]

[smjjames]

In America, maybe - European campaigning usually isn't quite as crazy because there's much less money behind it.
Cue conspiracy theory about Russia and the US financing their preferred Estonian parties this time.

It's possible that she meant the feces slinging between politicians, it can get really nasty.

[Owlbread]

Eastern European politics aside, the new "alternative media" in Scotland, formed as a result of the independence referendum, has grown somewhat in recent months. I must say that I do value the opinions of people on the Lower Boards of Bay 12 and I would like to hear your opinions on some of the new developments.

Firstly, our only pro-independence daily newspaper The National now has its own website that seems to require a subscription after X-amount of article viewings. I'm really not sure about the design of the web page, but I can't put my finger on what it is that makes me feel uncomfortable about it. It feels clean and crisp but something's just not right. Can anyone else see that?

Secondly, Scotland now has its own rolling news feed (rather than sporadic BBC Scotland sets) in the form of Common Space. I did put up a link to it a few months ago when it was going through a trial run, but it has formally launched now and it seems to be picking up steam. The editorial bias of Common Space is still towards independence but perhaps a bit more further left/"Student Left" than the National.

If you have criticism, particularly with regard to the design of the web pages (which would be fantastic) please put it forward because I may be able to take it to the various webmasters and we can hopefully get these sites to a higher standard. I think the thing I've noticed already is that these web pages are quite well suited to mobile phones and tablets, particularly Common Space. On a desktop PC I'm not so sure.

There's just something about these websites that makes me uncomfortable. I don't know what it is.

[scriver]

Eastern European politics aside, the new "alternative media" in Scotland, formed as a result of the independence referendum, has grown somewhat in recent months. I must say that I do value the opinions of people on the Lower Boards of Bay 12 and I would like to hear your opinions on some of the new developments.

Firstly, our only pro-independence daily newspaper The National now has its own website that seems to require a subscription after X-amount of article viewings. I'm really not sure about the design of the web page, but I can't put my finger on what it is that makes me feel uncomfortable about it. It feels clean and crisp but something's just not right. Can anyone else see that?

Secondly, Scotland now has its own rolling news feed (rather than sporadic BBC Scotland sets) in the form of Common Space. I did put up a link to it a few months ago when it was going through a trial run, but it has formally launched now and it seems to be picking up steam. The editorial bias of Common Space is still towards independence but perhaps a bit more further left/"Student Left" than the National.

If you have criticism, particularly with regard to the design of the web pages (which would be fantastic) please put it forward because I may be able to take it to the various webmasters and we can hopefully get these sites to a higher standard. I think the thing I've noticed already is that these web pages are quite well suited to mobile phones and tablets, particularly Common Space. On a desktop PC I'm not so sure.

There's just something about these websites that makes me uncomfortable. I don't know what it is.

I think it's the subliminal messages constantly flashing in the background.

[Antsan]

Firstly, our only pro-independence daily newspaper The National now has its own website that seems to require a subscription after X-amount of article viewings. I'm really not sure about the design of the web page, but I can't put my finger on what it is that makes me feel uncomfortable about it. It feels clean and crisp but something's just not right. Can anyone else see that?

The header extents across the whole breadth of the screen while the content doesn't.
The side bar is too broad (or the content bar too narrow).
The blue of the header is too bright and pulls the eyes upwards, especially with the contrast to the black directly below.

Secondly, Scotland now has its own rolling news feed (rather than sporadic BBC Scotland sets) in the form of Common Space. I did put up a link to it a few months ago when it was going through a trial run, but it has formally launched now and it seems to be picking up steam. The editorial bias of Common Space is still towards independence but perhaps a bit more further left/"Student Left" than the National.

My spoon is The pictures are too big. On my 1080p monitor one barely fits vertically into my browser window. This is especially bad as the pictures have obvious jpeg artifacts.

[Helgoland]

The websites - especially the first - look too cheap. They remind me of the kind of site with lots of whimsical articles about unimportant topics containing very little information, surrounded by clickbait. Paradoxically, making them look 'less clean' - less bright, first of all - would probably let them appear more trustworthy. Do a compare&contrast with The National, The New York Times and ZEIT ONLINE and you'll see what I mean.

[Owlbread]

I think it's the subliminal messages constantly flashing in the background.

So THAT's where all those nightmares are coming from. For the past 4 days I've been waking up drenched in sweat, confused and unable to stop worrying about the difficulties/challenges of building a Robust, Genuine New-Left Eco-Friendly Pro-European Progressive Alternative Approach to Austerity... and then there's all the inexplicable mental images of Alex Salmond being fed grapes on a leopard skin rug wearing a crown that keep popping into my head.

Aaanyway - thus far we've got the following proposals:

The National

1. Need to change the National's header/content ratio. It draws attention to the empty space on either side?
2. The blue is too bright. Maybe consider black again (as it used to have)?
3. Still too cheap-looking, perhaps as a result of looking "so clean". Maybe darken a bit, add a bit more texture to make it seem trustworthy?

Common Space

1. The pictures are too big for desktop PC's. Maybe that's alright for a mobile phone but on a monitor it's not good.
2. Same problems with cleanliness re: The National.

If anyone would like to see what the competition currently looks like, take a look at The Glasgow Herald or The Daily Record or even The Scotsman. As far as longer established pro-independence websites go, Bella Caledonia is one example, as is Wings Over Scotland.

The other new webpage I wanted to run past you all (but sadly forgot) was the one belonging to Newsnet Scotland, an old website that had a facelift earlier in the year. Again, I think it works better on a phone than it does on a laptop/desktop PC, and there's still something not quite right about it.

[Helgoland]

Texture - that's the word I was looking for!
I'd say your competition (except for The Scotsman, maybe) has pretty much the same problems, so it may just be that my taste is different from the average. Do note the background color of Newsnet Scotland, though! It makes the whole site much more eye-friendly, even if the layout is similar to that of the other sites.

And I had a bit of a laugh reading your second sentence: It sounds like you favor austerity too, but want to approach it differently

[wobbly]

Secondly, Scotland now has its own rolling news feed (rather than sporadic BBC Scotland sets) in the form of Common Space. I did put up a link to it a few months ago when it was going through a trial run, but it has formally launched now and it seems to be picking up steam. The editorial bias of Common Space is still towards independence but perhaps a bit more further left/"Student Left" than the National.

Amusingly if I'd just quickly looked at this page rather then clicking the news link I would of thought that Common Space was funded by the UK Government & had an annoying large ad on it. I wouldn't have bothered to look further if I hadn't come to the page from here. If that's someone deliberately trying to be clever then they're probably being too clever. More likely it's accidental & the editor knows what the paper is about & doesn't see it that way, where as I'm looking at the page with no idea what it's about.

Edit: A note on the format - I didn't actually notice the link to the side was even a link till my head went well it must be, & I moved the mouse over to it.

[reality.auditor]

Also, last time these dissidents had any political power (2011-2012 mass protests), there was a conspicuous lack of murders, even though by that logic, he should've gunned at least some of them down to suppress unrest. Instead, he just let people to roam a little, shouting obscenities aimed at him, to blow off their steam and return to normal life. A few people got arrested, but that happens at every major protest movement, like Occupy Wallstreet.

Did I read this argument right? Because Putin sometimes do not kill opposition, current murder was not by Putin?

[andrea]

I would take that as arguing that murder is not his usual response to opposition ( be it because he is a good man, doesn't feel any danger or has better ways).

[reality.auditor]

I would take that as arguing that murder is not his usual response to opposition ( be it because he is a good man, doesn't feel any danger or has better ways).

For me this argument is still ridiculous. Murder (as previous victims show) is sometimes his response, if he thinks it is most appropriate thing to do. That he used it relatively rarely means at most diminished possibility that he was directly responsible. He certainly allowed it (as Russian opposition is tracked 24/7).

[Arx]

...I'd just like to point out, as a neutral* observer, that while it is pretty suspicious that an opposition leader was shot dead outside the Kremlin many of you guys (well, mostly mainiac) seem to basically go "something we disagree with happened in Russia IT WAS PUTIN".

And upon someone pointing out that it wasn't necessarily Putin, so far the main response I have seen is "BUT IT WAS PUTIN."



So yeah. I'm just gonna leave again.

*Well, I do think Putin is as shady as a very shady thing. I don't have any kind of stake in this though, which you guys seem to.

[mainiac]

And upon someone pointing out that it wasn't necessarily Putin, so far the main response I have seen is "BUT IT WAS PUTIN."

Please point out a single case of someone asserting it was Putin.

Literally a single point of someone saying we know that.

[Arx]

Unless you're just harping on about Putin not investigating this because you think it makes him a generally sucky leader, that's your implication.

Admittedly, I'm probably reading too much into this. That's what I do when people seem to be getting up-tight.



See, this is why I generally stay out of these threads.