Another bad example

If posting links to badly designed sites is still in order, here is one:

http://www.gentlegiantsrescue.com/

It's for a non-profit that rescues dogs and places them with adopters. I'm
sure Burt Ward (yes, the former Boy Wonder) and his wife Tracy do a good job
with the dogs, in general. But their Web site is another matter. Crammed full
of large images, it takes minutes to load. God alone knows why they felt they
had to put all that stuff on the main page. It cries out for a redesign.

Christopher P. Winter wrote:

If posting links to badly designed sites is still in order, here is one:

http://www.gentlegiantsrescue.com/

It's for a non-profit that rescues dogs and places them with adopters.

I don't even have to load the site to find some fault with that one...
if they're a non-profit, then a .org address would be much more
appropriate than the .com address they picked, which implies that
they're a commercial entity.

--
Dan
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

In article <1153759810.219968.245430 (AT) i42g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
dan (AT) tobias (DOT) name says...

Christopher P. Winter wrote:
If posting links to badly designed sites is still in order, here is one:

http://www.gentlegiantsrescue.com/

It's for a non-profit that rescues dogs and places them with adopters.

I don't even have to load the site to find some fault with that one...
if they're a non-profit, then a .org address would be much more
appropriate than the .com address they picked, which implies that
they're a commercial entity.

Yeah, but when Average Joe or Jane enters the name into their web
browser WITHOUT the www. prefix or .com suffix, the default for most
web browsers is to fill it out with .com

George Chapman wrote:

Yeah, but when Average Joe or Jane enters the name into their web
browser WITHOUT the www. prefix or .com suffix, the default for most
web browsers is to fill it out with .com

I've never developed the habit of typing in addresses without their
top-level domains (a sloppy habit, in my view), so I'm not all that
familiar with what browsers do of an error-correction nature when
presented with such things. Trying it now by typing "foobar", I see
that my usual browser (Mozilla SeaMonkey) does indeed go to foobar.com,
but on the other hand Firefox seems to instead do some kind of search
and wind up on some .org site with "foobar" in its name. So browser
actions aren't necessarily consistent; I'll stick to typing in the
entire correct address when I know it, and going to Google when I
don't.

--
Dan