 |
|
 |
|
galaraf

Joined: 14 Oct 2005 Posts: 7
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:14 am Post subject: Gateways |
|
|
I love the fact there is no need for "force update" here. Still don't understand "tricking" .
If you can set it up so only one "vote" entrance to the site from a specific url is accepted in each 24 hour period, I think there would be less need for a gateway page. Some folks don't "bookmark topsite lists.
Seems to me sometimes a gateway page can be sort of a pain, in that each additional click takes time (no matter how short) and that can be frustrating to both net newbies (they're not always sure where they are or why they are there) and to those who may be somewhat impatient to get to the "bottom line".
Also:
Some lists have a way for folks to rate a site (usually 1-5 or 1-10) and/or leave comments. I like the idea of the comments because it gives folks a way to express a reason why they like the site, but the "rate a site" - well, I find it pretty subjective unless it could be made so the rating wouldn't count without adding comments as to why the overall rating.
My reasoning: If sites are listed in order by visits, popular sites will be at the top, however, if a site is "rated" (and the list is in order by "ratings"), sometimes sites that seem to look "impressive" because they use some "special" technology or have a "neat"-looking interface can get a higher rating than a site that has better overall content but just doesn't look as "impressive". I've been to several sites that look great but are have little content and I've been to some sites that have virually no graphics but DO have lot of great info. To me, that's when you need to have comments that justify ratings.
Just food for thought, in case you're thinking about adding a "ratings" capability.  |
|