*cough* Excuse me while I brush off the dust and cobwebs. One would be forgiven for assuming I’m off enjoying the fabulous sunshine the UK is getting at the moment, but you’d be so wrong. When I’m not working my ass off (even on Fridays at the moment) I’m sleeping. Apparently the “bouncy”/”energetic” second trimester only happens to other people.
Anyway, I’m not blogging to complain about being pregnant (if I get started, you’ll be crying tears of boredom into your keyboard by the end of the 2nd paragraph). Instead, I have another complaint. I have noticed, with some disdain, that “unrequested” reviewing is becoming popular. I wouldn’t go so far as to say I invented unrequested website reviewing (that’s almost as funny as the time I thought I’d invented the word “spork” as a kid…) but I take it to new levels, and so every dodgy review I read that’s filled with errors and half-truths is like a stab through the heart.
Let’s take, for example, this group review of Jessica (swimchick) (it’s not recent, but I’m behind, give me a break). Clearly, given my Pants Award, I’m no stranger to pulling Jessica up on her website. Nonetheless, I’d like to think the things I mentioned were both accurate and reasonable. I don’t consider the following to be accurate or reasonable:
Why would someone need 1000+ unique hits JUST to be affiliates with you? Affiliates are not for hits, they are online friends who you comment regularly.
Now, I’m not sure what kind of happy clappy fairy land world this person lives in, but affiliating websites pre-dates personal sites and the need to pat one another on the back for a job well done each time a person blogs. Affiliation is for driving relevant traffic and backlinks, plain and simple. In light of this, one can clearly see that the reason why Jessica requires a 1000 hit minimum is to weed out the n00bs who open and close sites more often than I change my underpants, and that are only interested in Jessica’s site because they’re infatuated with her apparent popularity.
why don’t you install an ask and answer script? I’m sure people would appreciate it, seeing as you hardly reply to emails, from what I’ve been told.
FAQ scripts are more hassle than anything else and the foundation of a decent review should never be hearsay and speculation. (I’d like to point out at this stage that Jessica has always replied to my emails in a timely manner; more so than I ever do.)
Aside from that blatant misunderstanding of what it’s like to own a popular site, there’s also general abundance of dodgy advice:
It’s very important to have readable text, but sometimes, depending on what the links are, it’s good to make them a bit bigger than the rest so that it can pop out and catch the visitor’s attention.
Er, no. Differentiate between links and text with colour and an underline by all mean, but altering the text size is not the way to do it.
Swearing is definitely a turn-off so it is good that you mentioned it in your “guide to websites”.
Fuck off?
Joining competitions, forums and such is also a good idea. Too bad I’ve never seen you done any of these things you mentioned.
Jessica is on Snark…
If your own coding isn’t valid then how would you know how easy, hard, or beneficial it can be?
Because one can know how to validate and choose to not bother?
In “You can find the latter.”, “latter.” should be “ladder.”
No, it really shouldn’t.
I thought presentation was everything? I guess I’ve been mistaken… clearly.
Worst. Sarcasm. Ever.
I just moved on to your previous blog (that has a label at the top, ‘You must read this’ – awww mummy do I have too?) and noticed in your bullet point of new things you say you’re going to return comments. You feeling okay?
Seriously.. just what the fuck?
However, your website isn’t very original anymore, but you can’t be blamed for everyone copying you.
…and yet this is the 3rd/4th time it’s been used as criticism.
Note, hopefully with as much amusement as I did, the closing gem:
This review was not written out of spite or jealousy
…because apparently, writing that line will make it true. (Telling someone they “get enough hits” and/or insinuating they don’t deserve their visitors is pretty much as close to admitting you’re jealous without coming out and saying it as you can get.)
And you all thought I was exaggerating that stab to the heart part.
I am hoping at this point that I’m not alone in feeling a little sorry for the world of reviewing. Perhaps I’m just getting old, and my nostalgia for the days of epic length reviews and hours of learning the science behind web pages is misplaced. I can only hope that out there somewhere is a younger me, preparing herself to battle through the hordes of mediocre reviewers if only to carry on the metaphorical torch. Now there’s a scary thought.
01 Jun at 8:07 pm
When I read that review I pretty much had the same reaction as yours. Those girls were being so snotty…
01 Jun at 8:23 pm
"In "You can find the latter.", "latter." should be "ladder.""
WHAT THE FUCK. I would have got to that line in the review, read it and not even bothered with the rest. People should try having a firm grasp of the English language (like, writing at a 9th grade level would be REALLY SWEET) before writing things like this. Ladder? Really?!
01 Jun at 8:28 pm
"Even though this was an unrequested review we’d be pretty annoyed if you don’t take any of our advice. "
Who the fuck cares if she takes your advice? Oh no, now the reviews will be "annoyed" at me. What ever shall I do. GAH@!#
01 Jun at 8:58 pm
There are no good WPR sites left. :( There used to be a few decent ones, but it seems like they’ve all dried up. Now we’re left with this crap. :P
@Aisling That was a vocab word in like… grade 7. So, even grade 7 level would be nice. :D
01 Jun at 9:12 pm
One word: shoddy.
I cringed a little at the mediocrity… especially the grammar/vocabulary" corrections". Yay for American/British English.
01 Jun at 9:14 pm
Hahaha, I love your posts so much. They always make me feel better and give me a chuckle.
My favorite part is the ladder. Chuckling is awesome.
01 Jun at 9:20 pm
Oh no, ignore my last statement about the NAe and Be; my mistake.
01 Jun at 9:21 pm
First off, Jessica is just such an easy target. Ever since your pants award, she’s really changed things around her website quite a bit. This is the first time I’ve visited it in a while and I must say, I’m impressed with how much it’s improved. Secondly, the group of people who are reviewing Jessica’s website have pretty meh websites anyway with their own set of problems. Finally, as you’ve pointed, a lot of their points are unfounded or just plain redundant.
Well, maybe they did it for the lulz. Do people still say that?
01 Jun at 9:28 pm
Ladder? What the hell? Some people dumbfound me.
01 Jun at 9:31 pm
Lol, sounds like a lame attempt at getting some hits. I haven’t seen Jessica’s site in quite a while, and she has definitely made many improvement. Saying pointless things like "you need and ask and answer script" and you spelled blah blah wrong (especially when it isn’t :P, of course it is wrong yay if not you look like the idiot). It’s not really a review, it’s being nitpicky with out of spite undertones. Oh wait they said "This review was not written out of spite or jealousy" … hmm, yeah it sounds like it is. A review should at LEAST cover the basics of overall design, coding, blah blah blah. Not talking about she doesn’t reply to emails … I’m sure gets a lot and doesn’t have time to reply to each and every one. Maybe a q&a would help but I am sure asshats would go to town with it and spam and ask moronic unnecessary questions.
01 Jun at 9:40 pm
" In "You can find the latter.", "latter." should be "ladder.""
I almost shot Diet Pepsi out my nose.
01 Jun at 10:12 pm
Jem, I have a confession to make. *embarrassed* I was involved in that review. However, my part was the Myspace one and how relieved I am that there’s nothing you had to ‘make fun of’ that part.
I’m kind of embarrassed to be a part of that now that you’re pointing things out. :$
I like to think I wasn’t a stupid-o during my part because all I did was point out that there was an extra bit of coding that was showing in one of the Myspace layouts. :/ Anyways. . .
I mean, my site sucks balls, and I’m sure you can pick out a lot to say about it so I know that I probably shouldn’t be writing reviews about a site that’s obviously better/more popular than mine. Oh and also, Jessica has never responded to my emails. Even after months.
Anyways, I hope your energetic streak comes soon!
Talk to you soon. ;)
01 Jun at 11:07 pm
Ladder. Ladder. Ladder. She did not just- LADDER!?
Skimming through that review, aside from the things you’ve mentioned, this bit irks me:
"kinda should be kind of
I call em should be I call them"
Is it a crime to write with a wee bit of personality? It’s called voice and it’s a pretty effective writing device. Granted she’s missing the apostrophes, but it’s a biography, not a business letter.
01 Jun at 11:21 pm
"This review was not written out of spite or jealousy"
No? Well it was written for SOME reason other than to help Jessica. Note the attempts at sarcasm, the non-objective tone, etc. If it were simply to objectively critique, this line would not have even appeared.
02 Jun at 2:51 am
Of course there’s a younger you. In your belly :P
02 Jun at 3:42 am
I also love how they tell her to get rid of all her celebrity images. I’m not a fan of celebrity stuff either but I don’t think they should tell her what to have and what not to have unless she’s doing something illegal. They also just beat her down passive aggressively, you’ve got some examples of that already up.
I also love how they are constantly correcting her grammar and it’s either something that doesn’t need to be corrected or they correct it incorrectly…niiiice. I’m glad my site isn’t popular enough to attract this kind of thing!!
02 Jun at 4:07 am
Ouch. Ew.
02 Jun at 9:16 am
The ladder part also put me off. Goes to show that they don’t know shit on what they’re talking about.
"This review was not written out of spite or jealousy, we just wanted to voice our opinions and actually try and help you."
It’s like saying "No offense…" when there really is something offensive.
02 Jun at 11:53 am
"It’s very important to have readable text, but sometimes, depending on what the links are, it’s good to make them a bit bigger than the rest so that it can pop out and catch the visitor’s attention."
Although being involved in that review, that I don’t agree with. Nor the swearing thing. Links being bigger than actual text is just fucking annoying. And I swear way too much anyway.
After reading the entire thing before it was published, I chose to skip the whatsit corrections because there were just too many. *doesn’t get the ladder bit*
And the review really wasn’t written out of spite or jealousy. In fact, after Jessica read it, most of her visitors were agreeing with it. That part was quite funny really. :3
"No? Well it was written for SOME reason other than to help Jessica. Note the attempts at sarcasm, the non-objective tone, etc. If it were simply to objectively critique, this line would not have even appeared."
HEY MY PART DIDN’T INVOLVE SARCASM :( did it? I try to avoid sarcasm in reviews. It’s just taken the wrong way. Actually my sarcasm is taken the wrong way most of the time anyway…
I still don’t get the ladder bit.
02 Jun at 12:02 pm
"In fact, after Jessica read it, most of her visitors were agreeing with it. That part was quite funny really."
…I fail to see how that’s a measure of anything?
02 Jun at 12:17 pm
How did that even make sense in my own head when I typed that – what I meant was the majority of the people who visit SC who read that review agreed with it. i.e., the wanting loads of unique visitors just to be affiliates is stupid, her bad grammar etcetera. I would go on but even looking at the review makes my eyes go funny :(
02 Jun at 12:29 pm
But how many of her visitors have any idea what it’s like to have that many visitors and need to manage them?
Think about it, if Jessica – or, if I – opened up free links to anyone who wanted to apply, how many emails do you think we’d receive on a daily basis? I already get upwards of 10-15+ per week (offering payment, or just laying on some whiny story about how their website only gets 3 hits a day) and that’s DESPITE having 2 notices on my contact page saying that I don’t do advertising and I don’t do link exchanges.
Her grammar is irrelevant, I didn’t dispute that it needs work. (So does mine, it’s a losing battle…)
02 Jun at 12:35 pm
haha! I sooo love the "ladder" bit as well as the "…we’d be pretty annoyed if you don’t take any of our advice." part.
Why would it be ladder??? Thanks for pointing that out Jem. ^^
02 Jun at 12:38 pm
I get around 70 unique visitors a day (actually that’s dropped lately due to my habit of closing. Surprisingly makes things easier) and have had to deal with retards asking me questions that could easily be solved by googling it, or asking me to do stuff for them, you do have to draw the line somewhere and say no. It wouldn’t kill her to respond to people occasionally.
Honestly, I have never thought about it from that point of view, however there’s people out there with fantastic sites who don’t get many visitors. I admit this is just hearsay, but I’ve heard of numerous people she doesn’t even stay in contact with her affiliates.
I think I’ve stopped making sense, so I’ll just stop now ;)
02 Jun at 12:40 pm
In "You can find the latter.", "latter." should be "ladder."
lol.
Just lol.
02 Jun at 12:45 pm
Sarah: Multiply your visitor count by 100 – and imagine the amount of mail that goes along with that – and you may understand why responding to people "occasionally" soon becomes a full time job all on its own.
Unless you’re volunteering to come and answer *my* mail… ;)
02 Jun at 12:53 pm
I would, however I have a fear of stupid emails. I’d rather just delete them or reply to them with *headdesk* … not that I have ever done that.
02 Jun at 1:20 pm
Well, I thought the review they did was good. And, like you said, you have done a review of Swimchick as well. You pointed out the things that you thought were reasonable and relevant, and I guess these girls thought that they had, too.
02 Jun at 1:29 pm
I know I’m a reviewer and I’m probably downright shit. You probably don’t like what I said in this review of Swimchick. Still, I think people have their opinions and a review is partially a matter of expressing opinion.
02 Jun at 2:05 pm
Jessica is a bit snooty. However, her site is one of the more popular sites. People need to realize that she can’t possibly return every comment back, nor does she have to. Just because some people return comments doesn’t mean she has to as well. Some of the points made in that "review" were valid and some were just stupid. I personally think that it was an attack on Jessica like so many before. Also, possibly a way to get more traffic. Sad really, her sites huge so she must be doing something right. Jealousy is a bitch!
02 Jun at 2:16 pm
Hate to burst everyones bubble here, because there’s a few who think this was done for the hits: I don’t know about the others but I didn’t contribute for the hits. I doubt that the others did it for the hits either.
@Anthony There’s better sites out there to be jealous of; and personally when I’m jealous of something I don’t go insulting it. That would just be pointless.
02 Jun at 2:16 pm
Gaahh, like everyone else, I am thunderstruck by the ladder.
ladder.
02 Jun at 2:33 pm
@Sarah, I find it odd that out of all the sites that you could have done a review on you choose one of the more popular ones. That’s the only reason I came to that conclusion. Don’t get so defensive, otherwise it just makes people think that further.
02 Jun at 2:42 pm
Ohhhh that pesky ladder. It will get you everytime.
*slits wrists*
02 Jun at 7:14 pm
I, for one, did not do it for the hits. . . I doubt I even get hits from that review.
I’m not even concerned about my hits – haven’t checked them since last summer.
I do what I do because it’s something I love. Although some of my stuff is valid, I really don’t see a point because I don’t plan on making web-design/coding/ANYTHING my career.
/off topic rant.
Anyways, yeah. I’m so embarrassed for doing this review :(
02 Jun at 7:16 pm
No point being embarrassed – just bear it in mind with future reviews. Trust me, I wrote some stupid things in some of my early reviews too :P
02 Jun at 8:32 pm
o_O Well, we all have to start somewhere, I guess.
02 Jun at 11:26 pm
I’m definitely going to… Because I like to ‘review*’.
*By review, I don’t mean anything near the pants awards or your type of review XD, I mean go over the site and see if there’s any errors that I can help fix. ;)
Anyways, yeah.
02 Jun at 11:51 pm
.info? Old bands? Equipment used to reach heights. Oh my validity! I’m getting giddy!
03 Jun at 2:57 am
Well… everyone does what he/she can. Something like: if you can’t beat them with logic, insult them. Or… use plain and simple bitchy attitude. It might just intimidate them.
03 Jun at 3:35 am
I think that the email part is probably true because I have this feeling that she only responds to you because for one, you are super popular. She feeds off of that, no offense to her because I don’t have any personal problems with her, but I have noticed that. She never responded to my emails either and I had a feeling that she had this "You aren’t important enough" air about her. Second I would say she responded a lot because of the context of the e-mails between you two. ‘Nuff said there.
03 Jun at 3:42 am
Agh sorry for the double commenting, I had problems. >.< I was also going to say (about the emails still) that I really didn’t think her site was as popular as everyone believes, but I could be very wrong. I haven’t heard anyone talk about it recently until this. Maybe it’s because I am in different circles, who knows? So the fact that she is "super popular" and gets a ton of e-mails might not work.
As a matter of fact I believe she should have responded to me quite quickly in seeing that I was purchasing paid advertisement from her. I was giving her real money and she was not responding, that’s a blatant lack of respect for the customer in my eyes. Needless to say I got barely any hits and never went back because I felt turned off by the whole bit.
And apparently that site with the review is in maintenance mode? hahaha I wonder.. if you had a dollar (or pound I suppose.. XD) for every site you shut down or put on maintenance mode Jem, you’d be rich!
03 Jun at 3:49 am
The latter/ladder part made me lol. For really real.
03 Jun at 2:34 pm
"…out there somewhere is a younger me…"
Omg, we are doomed!!!!!!! *runs away screaming*
03 Jun at 7:30 pm
True that @ everything Mimi said. Except for "And apparently that site with the review is in maintenance mode? hahaha I wonder.. if you had a dollar (or pound I suppose.. XD) for every site you shut down or put on maintenance mode Jem, you’d be rich!"
Because the owner of that site is my friend and I don’t think she really knows about this… ;)
04 Jun at 11:56 am
Aww. Closed site. :(
04 Jun at 5:16 pm
FIRST COMMENT LOLZ!!
04 Jun at 7:18 pm
Hi Jem, sorry for all of these comments, but I was just wondering (please be truthful) if it seems like I’m sucking up to you.
Apparently me being nice is coming off as brown-nosing and I just wanted to know if you had these same thoughts.
If so, sorry.
Thanks.
04 Jun at 7:27 pm
I don’t pay enough attention to care/decide/think about whether or not someone is sucking up – I treat everyone the same either way so it doesn’t really matter :P
Were you sucking up? Only you can answer that.
Edit: Hah, reading that back it sounds so bad… what I mean is, I don’t automatically assume to know when a person is sucking up because I don’t care if they are (not that I don’t care about people getting in touch or whatever). People have different ways of expressing things, I learned that a long time ago.
04 Jun at 9:11 pm
Ah, I love when people try to use the ‘your site is not valid, and therefore it sucks’ bit. You could have valid coding and your site could still be shit.
And honestly, the people who commented this asking for ‘forgiveness’ for taking part in the review should’ve really thought about that before they wrote a a [shoddy] unrequested review. You write one, don’t be surprised when you get one.
05 Jun at 1:52 am
Good to know. I was targetted for sucking up to you, but I just see it as being nice…
I have a feeling it was out of jealousy because I don’t think that persons site is as good as yours. But that’s beside the point. No point dragging it on when I know my true intentions. :)
07 Jun at 4:14 pm
Hahahaha, that was hilarious. I read that review a while ago and honest to God, it was the stupidest thing ever. None of them wanted to say their real opinions because Jessica’s site is like the elite.
07 Jun at 5:37 pm
"the elite"? Are you kidding me? We actually did say what we really thought about her website, and not all things said (at least what I said), were negative.
I was part of that review, and unlike Britney, I’m not embarrassed. I don’t see why you, Jem, feel the need to point us out like that for saying what we thought. Sure, we could have made a few mistakes here and there, but there’s no need to make fun of our review the way you did. That just shows what so many people say about you is true, you enjoy putting others down (that know less than you of course) instead of actually helping them, and you clearly have no life outside of the internet. I’m not saying you’re not skilled, because I can see that you are, but that doesn’t make you a better person than everyone else. No, I’m not saying YOU are saying that but that’s how you come across to a lot of people.
07 Jun at 5:42 pm
@ Nancy
Oh I’m pretty sure those girls said exactly what they thought, otherwise this whole thing wouldn’t have been that big of a deal.
The review was in their opinions, and I honestly think it should all be dropped. I mean, how long ago was this review done?! Sheesh.
07 Jun at 7:01 pm
See, I’d totally agree with you on all points, Liesl, if it wasn’t for these small facts:
* The post prior to this was published on the 15th May, and the one before that on the 4th. I’m sure if you’d check my activity at sites like twitter, etc, the gaps in posting would be more or less the same. I’ve been online a sum total of approx 2 hours today, having been offline since Friday. Now, hardly the posting behaviour of someone who lives on the Internet.
* I receive thousands of hits on a daily basis to tutorialtastic, and to my free scripts and articles here. These people don’t know me; they come here purely to be taught or to get something for nothing (and indeed, cost me hundreds of pounds in bandwidth on a yearly basis). Some of the very people you defend are using my scripts, or writing tutorials based on my code. I have an inbox full of help requests – which, apart from the unreasonable – I will get around to answering. Hardly the behaviour of someone who doesn’t like helping people.
So please, if you’re going to attempt to insult me, do us all a favour and base it on fact rather than the same regurgitated crap everyone else tries (and fails) to pull.
07 Jun at 7:51 pm
It was not an attempt to insult you, it was just my opinion about you and this post. I could have been wrong about the part about you only having a life online, but my point is that many people get a bad impression of you because of posts like these, especially all your mean comments about other people. It’s not nice. You may say you don’t care about what people think because in the end, they still ask for your help and use all your resources, but it’s not about your work, it’s about the way you act and refer to people. It’s just not cool. But then again, that’s merely my opinion, and many others’ who are too scared to say anything… The only reason why I bothered to comment on this is because I was involved. I do not want any drama nor am I "scared" that you’d review my site and make me look bad. You can do whatever you want, honestly. In the end, I still feel the same way about you and your attitude towards those that know less than you… If you really want to help people, why do you like making fun of and trash others? Because this post was more than just your opinion on bad unrequested reviews; you were making fun of the group of people that participated in Swimchick’s review, completely aware of how many people would see it. Isn’t that called trashing someone else? Yet you say you’re a helpful person… So you help but also like putting people down. How nice.
07 Jun at 7:56 pm
Oh noes, someone on the Internet thinks I’m a meanie. However am I going to sleep tonight?!
07 Jun at 8:03 pm
@Leisl, Jem is very helpful. She has responded to everyone of my emails and even emailed me to tell me that the contact form I had was insecure. Jem bases her opinions and statements on mere fact. She knows what she is talking about which is what makes her so popular here on the web. She is known for being "cruel" however, being cruel and being honest shouldn’t be considered the same thing. She says it how it is, whether or not people like it.
About her not having an online life… There was a moment where she didn’t blog for a long while. She’s pregnant ya’know, so I’m sure she does things outside the interweb. A lot of us look up to Jem, thus why I am writing this comment. You should really open your eyes and not listen to the others who were "butt hurt" from statements Jem made…
07 Jun at 8:19 pm
@Anthony Well we already talked about all this on Twitter so I have nothing left to say. She may be helpful but to me it seems like she only does it to look good, and show off with all she knows. I don’t believe she’s really sincere. That’s all.
08 Jun at 2:16 am
@Liesl, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade. Sincere or not, Jem does make certain valid points regarding that review. Instead of turning this into a personal issue, perhaps you and your group of reviewers can use this opportunity to write "better" reviews. Granted, I don’t mean for you to write something to please Jem and only Jem, but why not take her points and make the best out of it?
08 Jun at 2:57 pm
Okay, I really don’t see the point of this blog. I mean, why review a review? and if your not trying to put these guys down (most of whom are very nice and honest people) then why did you call them "mediocre reviewers"?
To be honest, the only real thing WRONG with the review was the ladder thing, no? I really don’t understand what they were supposed to type there but either way, a typo in a review isn’t unheard of is it? I make typos all of the time but I don’t see people writing huge blogs complaining about it, do you? Plus, personally, I think validation is important and I assume you do too really considering you yourself have said you converted "all 200+ pages of my website to this beautiful, lower-case, tidy syntax and was getting the green light from the validator". Returning comments is key for any website. I’ll sure as hell be offended if I spend ages writing this (and at this rate I will with my kitten climbing over my laptop pushing keys) and you don’t leave some note that you read it. (not neccersarily saying she has to go to each and every website and give a lengthy reply, just as you do maybe, leaving a comment every so often on the blog leaving a sentence or so to each decent comment).
Sure, some of the review is a little shabby but to be honest, nobody can really call themselves a perfect reviewer can they? even if they are "ultimately better" than everyone else.
08 Jun at 3:59 pm
"However am I going to sleep tonight?!"
Wtf, I thought you were a vampire or something. Way to crush my dreams. ;__;
08 Jun at 4:40 pm
@Becca:
"Latter" means "later". If you were listing, "Hamster, cat, dog," the dog would be the latter. The reviewer thought it should be ladder, as in *a* ladder.
08 Jun at 6:45 pm
@Eka Yeah, I totally get what ‘latter’ means, I just didn’t understand why she thought it should be ‘ladder’. A reading error I assume?
08 Jun at 7:03 pm
@becca
Exactly. ;)
08 Jun at 10:03 pm
Isn’t this an unrequested review?
09 Jun at 3:12 pm
Anna: I wouldn’t call this a review. At most "a few remarks about a review".
09 Jun at 5:16 pm
@Anna: What Vera said, plus the fact that Jem wasn’t demeaning unrequested reviews as a whole (since she is the queen of that genre of reviews) she was just saying THAT specific one wasn’t very good at all….and it wasn’t. :P
13 Jun at 6:46 am
If she wanted to be agressive at getting hits, then she should have just tried to improve her site and then tried to learn social media. If done properly, she could succeed. But in the regular blog community in this end of the spectrum, she will not find what she is expecting.
Unexpected reviews may be unwelcomed at first, especially if it is true and seems a real blow to whatever ego exists… it is a visit. A review is actually flattering even if it gives negative attention. It is a way to try to improve.
13 Jun at 3:28 pm
@Becca yeah, it probably was a reading mistake, but I still don’t see how ‘latter’ makes any sense in that sentence, but that’s like a minor thing, so why even mention it? The point of that review was to let Jessica know that there are a few thing she could improve on her site and also to point out that she DOES offer good stuff (especially the tutorials); it’s not all negative stuff. Her site may be popular and all but it still needs improvement. I reviewed her article (the only one she has), and I pointed out a bunch of good things about it. So not everything said on the review was bad. Fortunately, this subject is over, I just felt like I needed to clarify that the purpose was to help, and not trash her website.
13 Jun at 3:28 pm
@Becca yeah, it probably was a reading mistake, but I still don’t see how ‘latter’ makes any sense in that sentence, but that’s like a minor thing, so why even mention it? The point of that review was to let Jessica know that there are a few thing she could improve on her site and also to point out that she DOES offer good stuff (especially the tutorials); it’s not all negative stuff. Her site may be popular and all but it still needs improvement. I reviewed her article (the only one she has), and I pointed out a bunch of good things about it. So not everything said on the review was bad. Fortunately, this subject is over, I just felt like I needed to clarify that the purpose was to help, and not trash her website.