Originally Posted by Kebron

Anthonyon:


A bit arrogant for a newbie, aren't you. I've been involved in web development projects for four years, and I have a pretty good idea of what works and doesn't work in terms of design.


Don't see a need for another graphics design program, the quality of the graphics are perfectly fine. BTW, this coming from someone who has a grainy banner on their own site.

How do you know we haven't already; PHP is executed at the server and doesn't show up in the source code

Taylor wrote:

If typing fast means that you don't know what you're typing, then maybe you should slow down. I didn't really see a point to your review, aside from expressing your distaste for the website in a suspiciously passionate manner. Simply stating that the website is not clear and not professional without being able to point out anything specific is not particularly helpful.

So when asked to be more constructive and specific, this is what you came up with? Rummage through our source code, like a hungry bear on the prowl for scraps of food, to find a few insignificant errors. As a PS and a helpful hint this would be more appreciated, but as the main back-up for your earlier statements I'm afraid that this stretches a bit thin. You still are not able to point out what is "not clean" and "not professional", and why the "graphics DO NOT look professional". I get the impression that this is more of an abstract feeling that you get, for some reason, when viewing the site. But hey, you have a right to your opinion. However, seeing as you're posting it under the guise of "being helpful and constructive" I equally have the right to point out posts that are not helpful and constructive. After I did so, it had the effect of making posters at least make an effort to be somewhat more constructive -- yourself included.

We don't have errors per se, only in regards to 4.01 Transitional. However, I don't think you should be the first person to point out errors seeing as you have enough with your own website. You have a lot of errors, your site is not valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional.

This is a project that we are donating our time to and, seeing as this is not in abundance, we are on a tight schedule. The reason the site is not validated exactly as HTML 4.01. transitional is because of something called cross browser compatibility. Same reason we use tables instead of CSS. Also, our website displays useful information in under 8 seconds on a 56k connection -- which is not bad. It loads completely in 11 sec. as opposed to your site which loads in 17.8 sec.

Antsy and ZeebleHosting wrote:

I never complained about getting negative reviews, I only pointed out that they were not constructive or helpful. If you bother to read the forum rules for site reviews you'll notice that it tells you "Offer as much constructive comments as possible. Simply posting "Nice Site" won't qualify". If you see something that can be improved, if you have something constructive to say (good or bad) then let me know. However, I'm not interested in hearing meaningless statements such as "Nice Site" or "Your Site Is Ugly". You see, if you have nothing useful to say you should not post a review. The forum rules are very clear on this, and by reminding you lot of this I am only helping others (and possibly yourself) get more constructive and meaningful reviews on your websites

Originally Posted by Brent

[b]Your getting these responses now only because youve resorted to fighting back and now look, you missed out on the chance to return to us on a professional level for future feedback without an unbiased opinion.