To help soothe the disappointment of my lost Pantsing opportunity, I went to rev.iew.me and did eenie meenie on the websites page. Lo, my cursor fell on Inked By Erin, which is quite a nice coincidence given our history. Fancy that.
Erin is currently sporting a layout with some chick I recognise from Alice in Wonderland which, incidentally, is quite a weird film. I have read the book, but not for a loooooooong time (since I was like, 7?) but vaguely remember it was quite large and featured a lot more on riddles and things than Tim Burton’s version. Anyway, what? This is a Pants Award Jem, not a movie review.
So what about Erin’s site is deserving of a Pants Award? It wasn’t the blatant misuse of a celebrity image (and I’m not even talking about copyright; what’s the relevance of the Hathaway girl? (Woot, I remembered her name!)) and nor was it the weird/slightly boring About page which leaves me wanting to slit my wrists in emo solidarity… no, it was (surprise surprise) the Tutorials.
When I saw Erin’s CSS tutorials, I thought maybe I’d been too harsh on her. Her Multiple Columns tutorial, while lacking any real depth, uses advanced CSS3 techniques which I would typically assume to be beyond teenyboppers. (Ouch.) Something struck me about the text though… this line in particular:
Multiple columns are a major face of laying out text – newspapers have used them for decades.
I just didn’t get how something can be a major face of something else. One Googleage later and I discover that actually, multiple columns are a major facet of laying out text. To be honest, the sentence is still fairly clumsy, but hey, at least it makes sense now.
Of course now we have a dilemma. Which is more worthy of a Pants Award, stealing code and copy from an article and distributing it on your site, or changing said copy because you don’t understand what the word “facet” means?
30 seconds later and we can easily see where some of those other CSS tutorials came from: the same CSS3 series from Design Shack. I don’t know how she gets away with it to be honest, especially when you compare the quality of writing between the two. This line from one of Erin’s WordPress tutorials says all that needs to be said there:
Get the coding form you previous layout & look at in in you code editor.
I was hoping to be able to chuck a review of a review in her for your viewing pleasure, but unfortunately she’s not actually reviewed any websites yet. No surprise, given that one of her requirements is:
You must link me on every page of your website until the review is completed. I want to see my link on your website before you submit the application. I will check on this and deny any applications that do not have my link up.
I didn’t even require a link back on a single page when I was reviewing, let alone across an entire website. What has the WPR world come to?!
Should I point out the hypocrisy of reviewing HTML/CSS validation when her own website doesn’t validate, and indeed contains newbie mistakes like nesting header tags inside a paragraph? Oops, just did.
So. Erin, for being so lame as to steal someone else’s work; for writing shitty pointless tutorials of your own; for being an ignorant numpty when it comes to infant feeding; and ultimately, for trolling me all those months ago … have a pants award!
(Yes, this is the same pants as last time. Yes, I’ve run out of pictures of pants. Send me some!)