High Street at Cruelery.com

choad · 2007-12-11 17:21:53

Check out the bottom of your screen...

Yeah, not quite the right size. I'm working on it.

pALEPHx · 2007-12-11 19:31:37

Horrible. Too dark, wrong dimensions, etc. Was she willing to pay for a "real" one?

orangeplus · 2007-12-11 19:48:19

If you are going to dimension the image at that size, might as well ditch the text that goes with

pALEPHx · 2007-12-11 20:07:55

Ugh. STOP IT. "Unrivaled" has only one L, dammit. And now I think I'm seeing a RHPS ad.

Don't dream it, vibrate it.

choad · 2007-12-11 20:19:07

pALEPHx wrote:
Horrible. Too dark, wrong dimensions, etc. Was she willing to pay for a "real" one?

Pale, please, the insults aren't warranted and paint a bulls-eye on your username.

A few decibles lower, alright?

Sofie submitted the first image herself.

pALEPHx · 2007-12-11 21:34:43

Look... It's clearly a matter of personal disposition whether an honest critique from someone who's been creating web advertising for over a decade was intended as an "insult." This thread DID intend to draw attention to it. I'll take any hits for my commentary from someone who can prove, or provide, otherwise. I may have been curt, but it was not aimed at anyone in particular. No one said "I did this," so no one can be insulted. You can't bitch after the fact, and neither can Sofie, who knows I mean her absolutely no harm. Quite the opposite, in fact, so stop trying to point out animosity where there is none.

I stand on my judgment. Relegated to the footer, as it is, the banner needs to look more competitive. In this context--knowing who it is for, and not caring who made it--my saying "this is crap" isn't meant to convey that it shouldn't exist, only that it could be better and I'm entirely willing to help.

I didn't realize I had to be persuasive and diplomatic about the truth. This IS High-Street, after all.

George Orr · 2007-12-11 21:41:42

Jesus Christ, Aleph, you had been getting better for a while there...

I didn't realize I had to be persuasive and diplomatic about the truth.

You can dish it out ad nauseam but you can't take it, can you?

You are fairly interesting a good bit of the time, but goddamn you are one wordy sumbish.

orangeplus · 2007-12-11 21:48:59

Fuck Jesus, all yall chill the fuck out, he asked for comments, pHx gave him some. Don't like the snark? Where do you think you are?

and WTF did "paints a bullseye on your name" mean?

pALEPHx · 2007-12-12 00:47:33

George Orr wrote:
You can dish it out ad nauseam but you can't take it, can you?

You are fairly interesting a good bit of the time, but goddamn you are one wordy sumbish.

I'm sorry if I can't consistently meet your standards, girl. Did you want to say something about the ad, or just drop by to tell me I disappoint you?

orangeplus wrote:
Fuck Jesus, all yall chill the fuck out, he asked for comments, pHx gave him some. Don't like the snark? Where do you think you are?

and WTF did "paints a bullseye on your name" mean?

It was a veiled threat. It successfully conveyed the idea that I would somehow become more of a target than I already am. His misunderstanding created this threat, and you can't blame me for responding unfavorably to it. Anywhore...

The original banner was too big, utilized a common system font unsuited to its purpose, and incorporated an image that--while inventive, despite its derivation from the old Cruel banner--described the product ambiguously. The second attempt was worse. It included non-specific imagery, an oversized typeface, and a misspelling.

I'm glad it's there (regardless of appearance), and that Sofie has a revenue stream. I would like to know how I can help, which may involve providing solutions rather than criticism. I do not readily provide solutions when people accuse me of attacking something they asked to have evaluated.

choad · 2007-12-12 01:30:26

pALEPHx wrote:
orangeplus wrote:
Fuck Jesus, all yall chill the fuck out, he asked for comments, pHx gave him some. Don't like the snark? Where do you think you are?

and WTF did "paints a bullseye on your name" mean?
It was a veiled threat. It successfully conveyed the idea that I would somehow become more of a target than I already am.

Veiled? Obviously, I'm slipping. Insult people and they bite back. This is not breaking news. If you're sincere when you repeatedly insist you don't enjoy the abuse, then stop and think before you respond. Or not, it's all the same to me. Just don't complain about it day after day, week after week, and month after month.

You're right about Sofie's Ad, snark notwithstanding. I've spent at least a month trying to think of something but finally have to concede defeat. Probably requires someone who understands its product appeal. Volunteers?

pALEPHx · 2007-12-12 14:56:47

choad wrote:
Insult people and they bite back.

I can't insult a specific person if you deliberately left it unclear who created the banner(s). Regardless, my comments were about the item in question, not whoever made it, which is a necessary distinction too many seem incapable of making. If I had known she created it, then would either of you have wanted me to lie? Comments against my person, when I'm only doing what was asked of me, are tacky (but endurable). If you want my help on the thing, then you know where to send the specs.

Chiefly, I need to know if images from her site can be used, if they are licensed to or owned by her. An ad of that kind is a little different from the HS headers, and I'd like to do a good enough job that she can use it elsewhere if she wants.