... Caught unawares...
Posted on: June 1, 2009 at 4:24am
... what the?... suddenly there's a new format, and I'm not entirely sure how to get around... indeed, there seems to be noone else here...
... (lonely, so lonely)...
... and as a brief initial critique:
- no warning
- no explanation as to how to get about the place (save "press buttons and go")
- with the previous set up, I could see everything that was going on (the what AND the who), and I don't see that now
- where are the pretty pictures, the thing that gives a sense of immediacy and place... blue san serifed headers are oh-so-corporate but hardly helpful or friendly
- who is the cgi bimbo and how does that reflect HcN?
- previously I got a sense of community, now I feel I've opened a late 90's try-hard-to-be-cool magazine
... initial response:
- could do better, this seems half done
... (lonely, so lonely)...
... and as a brief initial critique:
- no warning
- no explanation as to how to get about the place (save "press buttons and go")
- with the previous set up, I could see everything that was going on (the what AND the who), and I don't see that now
- where are the pretty pictures, the thing that gives a sense of immediacy and place... blue san serifed headers are oh-so-corporate but hardly helpful or friendly
- who is the cgi bimbo and how does that reflect HcN?
- previously I got a sense of community, now I feel I've opened a late 90's try-hard-to-be-cool magazine
... initial response:
- could do better, this seems half done
Replied: Jun. 1, 2009
Glad to see I'm not the only one shocked by this. It does seem half done which makes me wonder if this is the reason why I can't post a new blog. It would be nice to see some sort of news flash about this.
Replied: Jun. 1, 2009
I take that back about not being able to post a blog....seems like I had to switch browsers. :\
Replied: Jun. 1, 2009
... Noooo - don't back done now, TheNyx, stay the course, raise the banners... you've already got them on the run... "It would be nice to see some sort of news flash about this" - see? no sooner did you start to push than Jon Llyr quickly buckled coughed up a hastily scribbled mea culpa!
... keep going TheNyx, they fear your wrath...
... keep going TheNyx, they fear your wrath...
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
I take issue with this woman on the banner, it is objectification of womens' bodies and seeks to alienate women on this site. It is easy enough to avoid posts that are targeted mainly for men through the title, however, the banner cannot be escaped no matter where you are looking on the site.
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
Hello all,
Thank you for all your input. As Jon has already stated in the "Everything HCN" Forum, we are still not out of Beta phase - we're more like "Beta Phase Mach II" now, and we will no doubt encounter a few bumps this week with the new site. Please do stick around... indeed, we are gratified that you all care enough to voice your concerns! I promise that it will be worth it in the end.
Hailey - In no way is it our intention to objectify women. Considering over half of the HCN team are women - most of whom hold strong opinions on many "feminist" issues (example: Adrienne, Catwoman and myself)... we try to objectify everyone in equal measure.
Further, we feel that "Eva" represents a strong and sexy woman and icon for our site, and we consider ourselves a woman-friendly community.
If you would like to start a discussion in the forum about Eva, please feel free to do so - in fact, we encourage it!
Again, we thank you for your opinions, and please do keep them coming!
Thank you for all your input. As Jon has already stated in the "Everything HCN" Forum, we are still not out of Beta phase - we're more like "Beta Phase Mach II" now, and we will no doubt encounter a few bumps this week with the new site. Please do stick around... indeed, we are gratified that you all care enough to voice your concerns! I promise that it will be worth it in the end.
Hailey - In no way is it our intention to objectify women. Considering over half of the HCN team are women - most of whom hold strong opinions on many "feminist" issues (example: Adrienne, Catwoman and myself)... we try to objectify everyone in equal measure.
Further, we feel that "Eva" represents a strong and sexy woman and icon for our site, and we consider ourselves a woman-friendly community.
If you would like to start a discussion in the forum about Eva, please feel free to do so - in fact, we encourage it!
Again, we thank you for your opinions, and please do keep them coming!
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
To add to what Joanna has so eloquently said, I'd ask everyone to just stay calm for a few days as we work out the kinks.
Nigel, I am sorry that the change in site blindsided you, that was not our intention, in fact to be perfectly honest one of the reasons we didn't send out a general message to all members was that we the administrators ourselves were having problems with our functions with the new site loading. This is what happens when a new site goes up, this is why we haven't "officially launched" still despite changing the format.
As you can already see, the blog entries we have all grown familiar with are back up complete with thumbnails as usual. In fact you'll notice the format has barely changed from the original, the weekly features are all down the right hand side, the daily blog posts are now back where they used to be. The only big change in location are the podcasts which are now across the top.
Further Nigel, we totally appreciate your comments and will take them into consideration, but is it possible not to take things too out of proportion, suggesting some kind of coup "raise the banners... you've already got them on the run..."? We are a site that supports each other, not an "us" against "them" sort of place. To say that John "buckled" and cried "mea culpa" suggests something quite unpleasant, that he was secretly trying to get away with something until he was caught out. As I've already explained, the lack of message was a simple matter of our functions not working, and trust us, it was as frustrating for us as for you. I'm sorry if somehow this change in format has personally offended you that you feel the need to offer your very valid criticisms with a tinge of insult "now I feel I've opened a late 90's try-hard-to-be-cool magazine". We have always thought we had an excellent relationship with our members, being active members ourselves, not just godlike figures sitting around and watching the site from afar (well except for me, I am truly god like). Can we try to work on this together, and not the very first day of the change decide to choose sides? We are all adults here after all.
Hailey - I would like to add onto what Joanna said. We in no way intend to objectify women with Eva in our banner and what's more we in no way are "seeking" to alienate women on this site, I hope you would know us better than that by now (and once more considering our team consists of half a dozen women, two of whom are published authors, one with her MA, another who does stunt choreography, another who works in a comic book store, and another who is a website designer, you could be hard pressed to find a group of women less objectified - unless using us for our brains is objectification . . . maybe it is . . . ). That being said, Joanna's suggestion is an excellent one, why not start a thread debating this very subject? If you would like you can even write a blog post and we can feature it.
Thank you all, again, for your suggestions. Please believe us that we take them all very seriously and appreciate how much you have invested in the site that you take the time to comment. I hope you guys will stick with us through the rough patch and that this site will continue to flourish. Keep visiting, keep contributing, and keep keeping us in line. We're nothing without you guys!
Nigel, I am sorry that the change in site blindsided you, that was not our intention, in fact to be perfectly honest one of the reasons we didn't send out a general message to all members was that we the administrators ourselves were having problems with our functions with the new site loading. This is what happens when a new site goes up, this is why we haven't "officially launched" still despite changing the format.
As you can already see, the blog entries we have all grown familiar with are back up complete with thumbnails as usual. In fact you'll notice the format has barely changed from the original, the weekly features are all down the right hand side, the daily blog posts are now back where they used to be. The only big change in location are the podcasts which are now across the top.
Further Nigel, we totally appreciate your comments and will take them into consideration, but is it possible not to take things too out of proportion, suggesting some kind of coup "raise the banners... you've already got them on the run..."? We are a site that supports each other, not an "us" against "them" sort of place. To say that John "buckled" and cried "mea culpa" suggests something quite unpleasant, that he was secretly trying to get away with something until he was caught out. As I've already explained, the lack of message was a simple matter of our functions not working, and trust us, it was as frustrating for us as for you. I'm sorry if somehow this change in format has personally offended you that you feel the need to offer your very valid criticisms with a tinge of insult "now I feel I've opened a late 90's try-hard-to-be-cool magazine". We have always thought we had an excellent relationship with our members, being active members ourselves, not just godlike figures sitting around and watching the site from afar (well except for me, I am truly god like). Can we try to work on this together, and not the very first day of the change decide to choose sides? We are all adults here after all.
Hailey - I would like to add onto what Joanna said. We in no way intend to objectify women with Eva in our banner and what's more we in no way are "seeking" to alienate women on this site, I hope you would know us better than that by now (and once more considering our team consists of half a dozen women, two of whom are published authors, one with her MA, another who does stunt choreography, another who works in a comic book store, and another who is a website designer, you could be hard pressed to find a group of women less objectified - unless using us for our brains is objectification . . . maybe it is . . . ). That being said, Joanna's suggestion is an excellent one, why not start a thread debating this very subject? If you would like you can even write a blog post and we can feature it.
Thank you all, again, for your suggestions. Please believe us that we take them all very seriously and appreciate how much you have invested in the site that you take the time to comment. I hope you guys will stick with us through the rough patch and that this site will continue to flourish. Keep visiting, keep contributing, and keep keeping us in line. We're nothing without you guys!
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
As per usual, Joanna and Adrienne are wonderful ambassadors for HcN - but I just gotta add...
see? no sooner did you start to push than Jon Llyr quickly buckled coughed up a hastily scribbled mea culpa!
Excuse me but WTF?!? Nigel, come on. What the freakin' hell was that all about? I broadcasted a message to the membership the second the technical difficulties would allow. Mea culpa my posterior...
JL.
see? no sooner did you start to push than Jon Llyr quickly buckled coughed up a hastily scribbled mea culpa!
Excuse me but WTF?!? Nigel, come on. What the freakin' hell was that all about? I broadcasted a message to the membership the second the technical difficulties would allow. Mea culpa my posterior...
JL.
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
... nah, in this case the mea culpa is mine... the first missive was written at the wrong end of the night, and the second written, though still with some sense of annoyance, with tongue planted in cheek... sitting cheek-by-jowl, as it were (or p'haps cheek-by-scowl), I appreciate that the affronted cynism of one flavours the cockiness of the other...
... in regards to the first, and to Adrienne (and indeed to Joanna), while I don't recant from my observations, the manner of their communication could well have been better put... at the time it was a matter of some tiredness, some shock of the new-and-unannounced, and the desire to express same but in some brevity - that is, determined not to turn it into a rant, which I am aware I'm capable of... I understand the annoyance of glitches that catch you out, that then go on to affect us (me) - I've run, and been a part of organising committees of, enough Cons to know how that can happen and how it made me feel, for myself and of the misunderstandings engendered...
... I received:
"Greetings fellow nerds and nerdettes!
As you may have already discovered, there is a brand new Hardcore Nerdity Homepage. For the next few days, we will be doing a lot of construction that might screw around with some of the site's functionality. Worry not - our crack team of engineers always multiply their repair estimates by a factor of four so we should be up to warp speed in no time.
Thanks for your patience and continued interest in HcN. It's going to be bigger and better than ever!
Live long, prosper, and keep on hangin' and bangin'!"
... friendly and informative... unfortunately, it doesn't say what you did, Adrienne, ie. technical glitches prevented us (the team) from warning/informing you (the 'membership'), and I was responding to both aspects of that... "stay the course, raise the banners", "you've already got them on the run" and "see? no sooner did you start to push than Xxxx Xxxx quickly buckled" (all on the strength of one 'supporting' comment) are not intended to incited the lighting of molotovs, it is hyperbole... pointed but friendly hyperbole... it may well be that this shows some degree of blogging 'innocence' on my part that this would in fact be taken as seriously as it has... maybe it needs to be, and maybe this is your experience with such things coming to the fore...
... to Jon: your name was used because your name was on the letter, if it had been 'Patrick Murphy' then that name would have been used... as I say, the mea culpa isn't yours, it is mine...
Nigel.
... in regards to the first, and to Adrienne (and indeed to Joanna), while I don't recant from my observations, the manner of their communication could well have been better put... at the time it was a matter of some tiredness, some shock of the new-and-unannounced, and the desire to express same but in some brevity - that is, determined not to turn it into a rant, which I am aware I'm capable of... I understand the annoyance of glitches that catch you out, that then go on to affect us (me) - I've run, and been a part of organising committees of, enough Cons to know how that can happen and how it made me feel, for myself and of the misunderstandings engendered...
... I received:
"Greetings fellow nerds and nerdettes!
As you may have already discovered, there is a brand new Hardcore Nerdity Homepage. For the next few days, we will be doing a lot of construction that might screw around with some of the site's functionality. Worry not - our crack team of engineers always multiply their repair estimates by a factor of four so we should be up to warp speed in no time.
Thanks for your patience and continued interest in HcN. It's going to be bigger and better than ever!
Live long, prosper, and keep on hangin' and bangin'!"
... friendly and informative... unfortunately, it doesn't say what you did, Adrienne, ie. technical glitches prevented us (the team) from warning/informing you (the 'membership'), and I was responding to both aspects of that... "stay the course, raise the banners", "you've already got them on the run" and "see? no sooner did you start to push than Xxxx Xxxx quickly buckled" (all on the strength of one 'supporting' comment) are not intended to incited the lighting of molotovs, it is hyperbole... pointed but friendly hyperbole... it may well be that this shows some degree of blogging 'innocence' on my part that this would in fact be taken as seriously as it has... maybe it needs to be, and maybe this is your experience with such things coming to the fore...
... to Jon: your name was used because your name was on the letter, if it had been 'Patrick Murphy' then that name would have been used... as I say, the mea culpa isn't yours, it is mine...
Nigel.
Replied: Jun. 2, 2009
Adrienne and Joanna have already said all there needs to be said on the issue of gender stereotyping here, but speaking as Eva's designer (who also happens to be married to a serious feminist and is the father of a young girl), her entire look was very consciously intended to reflect HcN's cool geek girl quotient.
Adrienne, Joanna, Lesley, Casey and Meghan were all very much on my mind during the design process; the last thing I would come up with would be something that offended or objectified them. I wanted to convey a character who was smart, sexy, confident and kickass, all positive qualities as far as I'm concerned, and I think those are the qualities she projects.
Adrienne, Joanna, Lesley, Casey and Meghan were all very much on my mind during the design process; the last thing I would come up with would be something that offended or objectified them. I wanted to convey a character who was smart, sexy, confident and kickass, all positive qualities as far as I'm concerned, and I think those are the qualities she projects.
Replied: Jun. 5, 2009
Damn, I thought she was supposed to look like me. You know, without the 'stache.
Replied: Jun. 7, 2009
Again, we thank you for your opinions, and please do keep them coming!
Preferred the old layout, this one makes me want to visit here less. I won't get started on "Eva". Pissed me off so much I accidentally double posted in the thread for Girl Power. Whatever the intention, it failed miserably in my opinion.
Preferred the old layout, this one makes me want to visit here less. I won't get started on "Eva". Pissed me off so much I accidentally double posted in the thread for Girl Power. Whatever the intention, it failed miserably in my opinion.
Replied: Aug. 31, 2009
Late to the party here, but I'm back at HCN after a lengthy but unavoidable absence, and I've gotta say, "Eva" creeps me the heck out. And yeah, it does feel like serious objectification. I dislike it immensely, to the point where I'm scrolling down as fast as I can after each page click, to get her out of my browser window.
If y'all want to objectify everyone equally, as Joanna suggested, then how about either: allowing users to set a banner image in profiles > appearance > edit from a set of images which include both male and female images as well as non-gendered images altogether. Srsly, how about a spaceship, or a star-scape or something? Why's it have to be about the cleavage?? Or, failing that, create a set of rotating banner graphics that include a variety of images. Honestly, I'd prefer not to see T&A when I log in here at all, but if I'm going to, then I'd request a greater variety of body type -- including some male bodies and some non-gendered images.
If y'all want to objectify everyone equally, as Joanna suggested, then how about either: allowing users to set a banner image in profiles > appearance > edit from a set of images which include both male and female images as well as non-gendered images altogether. Srsly, how about a spaceship, or a star-scape or something? Why's it have to be about the cleavage?? Or, failing that, create a set of rotating banner graphics that include a variety of images. Honestly, I'd prefer not to see T&A when I log in here at all, but if I'm going to, then I'd request a greater variety of body type -- including some male bodies and some non-gendered images.
