James' First Blog. Ever.

Hi

Not sure what’s going on here much. I missed last Monday, but I know I'm in Katie's group. Apparently that means we're using the same criteria to evaluate a good and a bad website?

Therefore, "my" criteria is: (Copywright Katie Meyer 2010)

Name of the website - is it relevant to the content
How often has it been updated?
How easy is it to navigate?
Is there an index on the website to help users navigate the site?
Who are the authors of the website, are they credible?
Is there an internal search facility to help the user find the information they require?
The number of hits the site has received - determines how many people use the site
How easy the actual site is to find, e.g. is it available through all search engines - google, bing etc
Are external links valid/active?

My pants website: www.dokimos.org/ajff/

This is the official website of the church "Dokimos". After recovering from an unexpected photosensitive seizure, I was immediately drawn to the delightful colour scheme and corporate branding. As I ventured through the site:

- Some links were totally dead (disappointingly, this included the prayer request page)
- Some links took ageeeeees to load
- I felt especially privileged that the banners page was working, meaning I too could enjoy the quality graphics used on their home page
- I enjoyed the 134 pages of guestbook comments, most of which we're commenting on their website rather than their church.
- I was impressed to see the website had won no less than 22 awards, from the "Awesome Christian Site Award" and "Disciples of Christ Christian Site of Excellence Award", to the no doubt much coveted "Glory to God Award", and the bizarre "Excellence in Fishing Award" (or should that be phishing?)
- I was delighted when I clicked "send email" and my normal email box popped up, complete with "ACCEPT JESUS, FOREVER FORGIVEN!" in the subject heading - which saved me the job of typing it.
- However, the very best bit was at the top of the home page. A warning bar came up, the same as the ones you get for viruses, untrusted sites etc (yes, the ones you ignore). However, this one said: “You are possibly not secure in your own personal faith. Trust in God solely through His Son Jesus for the forgiveness of all your sins and the free gift of eternal life. Click here”.

Surprisingly, it doesn’t do too badly in the criteria. But for the reasons above, it’s pants.

My good website: http://www.arrse.co.uk/

Don’t panic, it’s not porn! This is the website of the ARmy Rumour Service, aimed at people serving in the British Army, although many members are not (apparently the majority). I’m an occasional poster on there, anonymous of course! The most popular part of the website is the forums, although there is an ARRSEpedia (like wikipedia) with such gems as: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/Walt

The forums have plenty to interest everyone, not just those that have a link to the forces (be warned – some threads are not to everyone’s taste). There are more than 50,000 members. The website is managed by 2 people “Good CO” and “Bad CO”, assisted by lots of moderators – most are/have been in the army. It is updated regularly and the forums are always in use (358 members online as I type).

It is very easy to navigate and is well laid out, with a good search function. It comes up when searching in google for a wide range of subjects to do with the army, which is how most people find and join the site. Especially young people who aspire to join the army, and they face endless amounts of grief when posing stupid questions like “do I need a hot water bottle for training”, “can I buy my own rifle as I don’t like the look of the issue one’s” and “how long will it take for me to be in the SAS”. It is often used by reporters, when you read in a newspaper “one soldier said….” it is probably something they cut and paste from ARRSE. It is known that the MOD monitor the site to evaluate reactions to changes, gauge morale etc – which proves the value of the site.


James