Review 2500

First impressions were good, the design of the site is simple, clean and well organized allowing easy navigation, content on the index page shows a good style of writing, yet I remained unsure whether I found the content appealing or not. Left hand navigation menu containing links to ‘about’ section which explains the intentions of the site as well a very brief (actually non existent) introduction to the author. Although each entry lacks the standard entry comments that come with most weblogs the owner seems to encourage interactivity from its readers in other ways – a forum and a clear contact link. Perusing the left hand menu also reveals some interesting diversions, three songs under audio and 2 films.

I approach most reviews in the same way, and so after reading the about section and quickly perusing the first page I headed straight to the archives in search of that crucial first entry, in this case I was to be disappointed, because the October 2002 brought up a error 404. Ideally that should be looked into and fixed. So, I headed to the next available month, November 2002 and was immediately presented by a whole host of short and concisely written entries supported by images. The author writes very well, he doesn’t mince with words and he comes to the point quickly. Quite often there is a very strong political statement in his entries; readers not agreeing with his every word must still admire the ability to put a point forward concisely.

A good design isn’t important when the content of a weblog is good, but it helps. This authors design is much like his writing; it is well organized, clean and suits its content. However, I would liked to have seen a navigation system which would have allowed movement from month to month in the archives, as opposed to having the reader return to the archive menu each time s/he wishes to move onto the next month.

The additional features complement the content of this site well, the additional audio and film material in the left hand column may not be to everyone’s taste but I found them rather interesting from a technical point of view. Absence of a comment system in the weblog itself is replaced by a forum, and while I personally like to have the ability to comment on a specific entry I can understand why someone would opt for this format. Other weblogs attempting to utilize forums have failed, often left unused by anyone except the author themselves, this is not the case with – an active community seems to have been established here, and it is definitely worthy of a look in.

I wasn’t sure what to expect when I arrived at, much less whether I would enjoy reading it, but I discovered quickly that, while I may not agree with his stance on some issues I enjoyed the way in which he puts his point across. His style of writing is catchy, to the point and wastes no words. The design of the blog reflects similar principles; it is clear, well organized and attractive. I do believe closer attention to navigation between archives can only benefit its readability. I’m not sure whether the content will appeal to everybody, but it is worthy of a look in for those of you who enjoy strong opinions put forward eloquently and in few words!

Now the rating, I really was not sure where to place this site. His approach to blogging has a certain uniqueness, his entries are well written and concise, and he’s funny. It wasn’t flawless, improvements to navigation, ensuring there are no bad links could only improve the readers experience. While I admit that the author’s choice of a forum works for him and his current readership I personally like to be able to comment on specific postings. It is for this reason that I award a rating of 4.5crushkill : digital cynicism