Comments on: Internet Annoyances http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/index.php/archive/internet-annoyances/ Cheap Printer Ink Sat, 21 Jan 2012 21:13:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Tele2002 http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/index.php/archive/internet-annoyances/comment-page-1/#comment-11515 Tele2002 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:41:45 +0000 http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/?p=967#comment-11515 Ah yes linkbiat, well I can handle linkbait 'if' what they contribute is relevant, but the one that is getting me at the moment is the site aggregator blogs, RSS aggregators I can understand, and really promote as they serve a purpose (like GraphicStart or the soon to be launch Pre-Media News) but I can't stand those blogs that don't contribute themselves and just use others! I was flicking through Colorwiki the other day and figured that it was so out of date as it was created by CHROMiX, Inc and thus had some restrictions on what could be modified, much like the new CrossRoads forum for Esko.... not very independant when you slap your own advertising all over what is meant to be a full community site! Ah yes linkbiat, well I can handle linkbait ‘if’ what they contribute is relevant, but the one that is getting me at the moment is the site aggregator blogs, RSS aggregators I can understand, and really promote as they serve a purpose (like GraphicStart or the soon to be launch Pre-Media News) but I can’t stand those blogs that don’t contribute themselves and just use others!

I was flicking through Colorwiki the other day and figured that it was so out of date as it was created by CHROMiX, Inc and thus had some restrictions on what could be modified, much like the new CrossRoads forum for Esko…. not very independant when you slap your own advertising all over what is meant to be a full community site!

]]> By: Jeff Lazerus http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/index.php/archive/internet-annoyances/comment-page-1/#comment-11501 Jeff Lazerus Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:59:58 +0000 http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/?p=967#comment-11501 I started editing wikipedia's entry for direct mail about a year ago. The original authors (?) were trying to define the term "direct mail" as "junk mail", which is not only perjorative but wrong. I went back and forth for about 3 months with them on this, but they kept revising my corrections. The problem is, although it would be great to avoid wikipedia, that is where most of the general public would see definitions of prepress, or premedia, or whatever. Perhaps we could outsource this job to the same people from India who are commenting on my blog for linkbait. They could hover over the wikipedia entry and police it so that what we (the experts!) always get the last and most authoritative word. I started editing wikipedia’s entry for direct mail about a year ago. The original authors (?) were trying to define the term “direct mail” as “junk mail”, which is not only perjorative but wrong. I went back and forth for about 3 months with them on this, but they kept revising my corrections. The problem is, although it would be great to avoid wikipedia, that is where most of the general public would see definitions of prepress, or premedia, or whatever. Perhaps we could outsource this job to the same people from India who are commenting on my blog for linkbait. They could hover over the wikipedia entry and police it so that what we (the experts!) always get the last and most authoritative word.

]]> By: Tele2002 http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/index.php/archive/internet-annoyances/comment-page-1/#comment-11487 Tele2002 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:16:50 +0000 http://www.prepresspilgrim.com/?p=967#comment-11487 I wonder if Wikipedia every entry has a human eye cast over it. I modified the entry last night for the Karawanken Tunnel in Slovenia after I noticed that the had mixed miles and kilometres and that has suck, but I tried to create an whole new entry for pre-media and got the big finger wagging stating that it must bear some relevance to the population (or some rubbish like that!) Seems to me that you have a community driven site that is policed a little to much! I wonder if Wikipedia every entry has a human eye cast over it. I modified the entry last night for the Karawanken Tunnel in Slovenia after I noticed that the had mixed miles and kilometres and that has suck, but I tried to create an whole new entry for pre-media and got the big finger wagging stating that it must bear some relevance to the population (or some rubbish like that!)

Seems to me that you have a community driven site that is policed a little to much!

]]>