Accessibility rant

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Adrienne

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 6:32:37 PM9/26/03
to

I just have to say this.

Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
on the radio?

The other one that bothers me is "Log on to www.example.com ", when its a
site that doesn't required any log on, like the local news channel. It's
probably confusing for people because they think they're going to be going
to a site where they DO have to log in, and they either a) don't understand
what that means , b) are frightened , c) don't want to spend the effort.

Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
difficult about saying the correct thing?

--
Adrienne Boswell
Please respond to the group so others can share
http://www.arbpen.com

Michael Wilcox

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 6:41:32 PM9/26/03
to
Adrienne <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I just have to say this.
>
<snip rant>

There's one channel arround here in St. Paul that really bother's me with
their site. First of all, it's bad (aren't they all?). Second of all,
everytime there's a mention of a site in a story, they say, as though
they've taken great pains to do so, "We've set up a link to their site".
Honestly, that's the least I'd expect, but whatever.
--
Michael Wilcox
mjwilco at yahoo dot com


Marvin Miller

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 6:41:34 PM9/26/03
to

"Adrienne" <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158...

Better yet - add a pointer in the DNS for the site and drop the www all
together. I can't believe how many sites still HAVE to be accessed by
www.x.y


m

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 6:58:49 PM9/26/03
to
Adrienne wrote:
> I just have to say this.
>
> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
> thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
> on the radio?
>
> The other one that bothers me is "Log on to www.example.com ", when its a
> site that doesn't required any log on, like the local news channel. It's
> probably confusing for people because they think they're going to be going
> to a site where they DO have to log in, and they either a) don't understand
> what that means , b) are frightened , c) don't want to spend the effort.
>
> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?
>
TV. My local channel just reported the Nigerian Scam like it was
a brand new discovery and they were doing a great service to the
community by bringing this new threat to light. Sheesh.

--
Cheers, Stevens, http://www.mbstevens.com/ via Linux/Mozilla
No blue screen of death, no Monopolysoft 'activation' trojan.

EightNineThree

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 7:12:03 PM9/26/03
to

"Adrienne" <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158...
>
> I just have to say this.
>
> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
> thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
> on the radio?
>
<snip rant>

Hehehe. I just had to educate my company's marketing department on that
this morning.
They just wrote a piece on a new online service we're providing and it was
"Click on __________" all over the place.


--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.


Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 6:57:40 PM9/26/03
to
Adrienne <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> I just have to say this.
>
> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
> thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
> on the radio?

> The other one that bothers me is "Log on to www.example.com ", when its a
> site that doesn't required any log on, like the local news channel.

> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so

> difficult about saying the correct thing?

That's one of my favorite rants -- everyone who knows me has heard it
at least as many times as it takes for them to scream at me, "Shut up
about it already!"

--
Art Sackett,
Patron Saint of Drunken Fornication

SeeSchloss

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 7:22:10 PM9/26/03
to
> I just have to say this.
>
> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company),
> and I thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to
> click on something on the radio?
>
> The other one that bothers me is "Log on to www.example.com ",
> when its a site that doesn't required any log on, like the local
> news channel. It's probably confusing for people because they
> think they're going to be going to a site where they DO have to
> log in, and they either a) don't understand what that means , b)
> are frightened , c) don't want to spend the effort.
>
> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"?
> What's so difficult about saying the correct thing?

Same thing here in France : always "cliquez sur...", like
you could "click on a site". You can click on a site when
you are on another website which provides a link to it, but
what they want to say is obviously "go to...".


--
SeeSchloß - http://gpu.sourceforge.net

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 7:53:45 PM9/26/03
to
In article <Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158>,
arb...@sbcglobal.net says...

> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?

When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Mark Jones

unread,
Sep 26, 2003, 10:33:13 PM9/26/03
to
"Adrienne" <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158...
> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?
You need to get a life, real quick.


Adrienne

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 12:00:13 AM9/27/03
to
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com>
writing in news:MPG.19de9b856...@news.charter.net:

> In article <Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158>,
> arb...@sbcglobal.net says...
>> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"?
>> What's so difficult about saying the correct thing?
>
> When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.
>

No, I don't see myself doing it. If I am going to click on something,
there had better be something to click ON. If I were watching some sort of
interactive television, and somewhere it said "Click on www.example.com",
and I could use my remote to so, I would.

Click on is really meaningless, especially in this instance for people who
do not really know anything about the Internet. That is why sites using
the AOL keyword actually say "AOL keyword XYZ", it tells people who use AOL
to use keyword XYZ to get to that site. Someone who is unfamiliar with the
Internet, and thinks the Internet means that blue E on their desktop, might
actually be looking to click on www.example.com.

Most people, even the least Internet savy, do know if you say "Go to
www.example.com" that they need to type that in the address bar, or a
search bar or something.

Talc Ta Matt

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 12:59:58 AM9/27/03
to
>"Click on
>www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
>thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
>on the radio?

Maybe it's not the exact reason they are saying "click on", but...

Certain internet users who frequent a site and don't actually bookmark it but
do know the web address for some reason won't actually type in
"www.whatever.com". Ever. Instead they go to a SE and search for "whatever.com"
(or just the whatever part), and click on the top listings.

I don't know an exact % of surfers who do this, but check your logs for SE
keywords containing your actual address.

I suspect sites with constantly updated content (thus, visited often) and easy
to remember domains are more prone to this. Which isn't really a bad thing, but
you'd rather have them bookmark it on the first visit.

Toby A Inkster

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 5:01:57 AM9/27/03
to
Adrienne wrote:

> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com"

Yes, I know. I don't know where you are, but they've been saying this in
the UK for about a year now and it's one of my little gripes.

I don't see where accessibility comes into it, it's just a silly and
nonsensical way of saying things.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=132

Mark Nobles

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 6:02:35 AM9/27/03
to
In article <Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158>, Adrienne
<arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?

Recently I said something about going to a website, and I was rather
sharply corrected with the comment that you don't really *go* to the
website, since that would be physically impossible to travel to all the
sites. What you do is send a request for the data from the website.

So, how about this for an advertising slogan:
"Have your web browser send for the data from example.com"?

Nah, me neither.

Mark

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 10:21:35 AM9/27/03
to
In article <Xns9402D5A9469D...@207.115.63.158>,
arb...@sbcglobal.net says...

> > When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.
> No, I don't see myself doing it.

You are not typical. The people in this forum are not typical web
users.

> Most people, even the least Internet savy, do know if you say "Go to
> www.example.com" that they need to type that in the address bar, or a
> search bar or something.

Most people? Most people? You are trying to think like a typical user,
but keep referring to your personal useage. You are not typical. You
have a better knowledge of how the web works. You distinguish between
"go to" and "click on" They don't.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

SeeSchloss

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 10:42:19 AM9/27/03
to
"Whitecrest" a pensé très fort :

If they don't distinguish, then why use "click on" ? If you
use "go to", not only typical users will understand, but
also more advanced users won't be pissed off. The problem
is only that people who make these ads do not know anything
about Internet, and they just think that "click on" sounds
more 'technological' than "go to".

Nick Theodorakis

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 12:59:49 PM9/27/03
to
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:02:35 GMT, Mark Nobles
<cmn-n...@houston.rr.com> wrote:

>In article <Xns94029E1EF524...@207.115.63.158>, Adrienne
><arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
>> difficult about saying the correct thing?
>
>Recently I said something about going to a website, and I was rather
>sharply corrected with the comment that you don't really *go* to the
>website, since that would be physically impossible to travel to all the
>sites. What you do is send a request for the data from the website.
>

Perhaps the phrase "Visit www.example.com" would be clearly understood
by most people. I have also heard "Point your browser to
www.example.com".

Nick

--
Nick Theodorakis
nick_the...@hotmail.com
nicholas_theodorakis [at] urmc [dot] rochester [dot] edu

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 1:34:42 PM9/27/03
to
In article <mesnews.dbea7d39...@seeschloss.net>, adresse-
n...@seeschloss.net says...

> >>> When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.
> >> No, I don't see myself doing it.
> > You are not typical. The people in this forum are not typical
> > web users.
> >> Most people, even the least Internet savy, do know if you say
> >> "Go to www.example.com" that they need to type that in the
> >> address bar, or a search bar or something.
> > Most people? Most people? You are trying to think like a typical
> > user, but keep referring to your personal useage. You are not
> > typical. You have a better knowledge of how the web works. You
> > distinguish between "go to" and "click on" They don't.
> If they don't distinguish, then why use "click on" ?

See the first line, because they "see themselves" doing it.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

SeeSchloss

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 1:37:05 PM9/27/03
to
"Whitecrest" a pensé très fort :
But how can you see yourself clicking on a website ??
You imagine the site opened in Internet Explorer, and
yourself randomly clicking on the page ??

Daniel R. Tobias

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 4:06:32 PM9/27/03
to
SeeSchloss wrote:

> But how can you see yourself clicking on a website ??
> You imagine the site opened in Internet Explorer, and yourself randomly
> clicking on the page ??

Speak for yourself... whenever I imagine myself going to a Web site,
it's naturally with my preferred browser, Mozilla.

--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

Daniel R. Tobias

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 4:09:00 PM9/27/03
to
Talc Ta Matt wrote:

> Certain internet users who frequent a site and don't actually bookmark it but
> do know the web address for some reason won't actually type in
> "www.whatever.com". Ever. Instead they go to a SE and search for "whatever.com"
> (or just the whatever part), and click on the top listings.
>
> I don't know an exact % of surfers who do this, but check your logs for SE
> keywords containing your actual address.

I've observed, from my own logs, plenty of hits through search engines
from people typing -- not MY address, but some other address that I
happen to mention in the course of my site. Generally it's in my domain
name site, where I'll write something about how stupid I think some
corporation is for using such an idiotic domain name as
WhateverStupidUnnecessaryDomainNameTheyreUsing.com, and when I check my
logs months later there'll be several hits a day to people typing that
domain name, where it turns out my site is better-indexed than the
actual corporate site at that address.

Daniel R. Tobias

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 4:10:58 PM9/27/03
to
Adrienne wrote:

> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?

Because ads are written by Marketing Types, and, almost by definition,
Marketing Types are drooling morons. I think a frontal lobotomy is one
of the prerequisites to a degree in marketing.

SeeSchloss

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 4:30:10 PM9/27/03
to
"Daniel R. Tobias" a écrit :

> SeeSchloss wrote:
>
>> But how can you see yourself clicking on a website ??
>> You imagine the site opened in Internet Explorer, and yourself
>> randomly clicking on the page ??
>
> Speak for yourself... whenever I imagine myself going to a Web
> site, it's naturally with my preferred browser, Mozilla.

Of course (FireBird for me) but since we were speaking of
the typical user who can't distinguish between 'click on'
and 'go to', Internet Explorer was the most appropriated
browser in this sentence.

Adrienne

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 4:45:42 PM9/27/03
to
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com>
writing in news:MPG.19df66f04...@news.charter.net:

Actually, that's not true.

Sometimes, people take things literally. If I say "go to www.example.com"
they can look at their browser and see the "Go" button by the address bar
(I'm talking about IE here), so they can figure out to type something there
and GO. However, if I were to say "click on www.example.com" they are
looking at their browser trying to figure out where to click.

I have tutored some people, and they have been confused by something that
said "click on" instead of "go to", in a magazine ad, whatever. These are
the same people who ask where the "any key" is.

Toby A Inkster

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 5:17:10 PM9/27/03
to
Whitecrest wrote:

> Most people? Most people? You are trying to think like a typical user,
> but keep referring to your personal useage. You are not typical. You
> have a better knowledge of how the web works. You distinguish between
> "go to" and "click on" They don't.

Last night I clicked on the pub for a couple of pints. When it was time to
click back home I decided to walk -- big mistake! It took ages to get back
and by that time I was busting to click on the toilet. After that I got
ready to click on bed. As soon as my head hit the pillow I clicked
straight on sleep.

Yeah, you're right. "Click on" and "go to" are synonymous.

William Tasso

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 6:05:09 PM9/27/03
to
Adrienne wrote:
> I just have to say this.
>
> Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> www.example.com" ...

>
> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"?
> What's so difficult about saying the correct thing?

local radio round here often suggests their listeners "send an email to
www.example.com"

--
William Tasso - http://WilliamTasso.com


John C

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 6:46:09 PM9/27/03
to
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:05:09 +0100 William Tasso posted:

> Adrienne wrote:
> > I just have to say this.
> >
> > Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on
> > www.example.com" ...
> >
> > Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"?
> > What's so difficult about saying the correct thing?
>
> local radio round here often suggests their listeners "send an email to
> www.example.com"

I frequently hear/see "Visit our website www.oursite.com and click on
[whatever]." The [whatever] is often a link to another site, so that
"clicking on" and "going to" are basically synonymous.

In a world where nobody knows whether their dog should lay down or lie
down, I don't think clicking on or going to really matters much.

--
John C

Steve Pugh

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 6:51:31 PM9/27/03
to
Adrienne <arb...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Today I heard a commerical on the radio that said "Click on

>www.example.com" (don't remember the name of the real company), and I
>thought to myself, how the Hell is someone supposed to click on something
>on the radio?

The usage that seems to have infected UK advertising lingo is "Click
onto/on to ..." which is an even uglier variation.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st...@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

Daniel R. Tobias

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 7:05:16 PM9/27/03
to
brucie wrote:

> In post <bl51gt$88o5o$1...@ID-139074.news.uni-berlin.de>
> William Tasso said...


>>local radio round here often suggests their listeners "send an email to
>>www.example.com"
>

> i remember seeing a pic a few years ago of a florists van (i think)
> with "visit our website:[aol email address]" on the side. i wouldn't
> be surprised if the pic was genuine.

A van that I used to see a lot around where I live had the dubious
address on its side, for some sort of business:

www.somebu...@aol.com

I don't know if they intended this to represent their Web address or
their e-mail address, but it seems dubious as an actual functional
address for either. (Does AOL permit screen names with dots in them so
somebody could actually get "www.wh...@aol.com" as their address?)

At work, I constantly have to deal with idiot customers who have the
insane compulsion to prefix any e-mail address with "www.", like they
are unclear on the concept of the difference between Web and e-mail
addressing. That's true of their typing their own e-mail address into
an online form (if their address is Some...@aol.com they'll type
www.So...@aol.com, so that our mail to them bounces; often they'll
mangle it further like by omitting the .com part, just saying
www.SomeLuser@aol) and their typing anybody else's address for outbound
mail; if they're told to write to custome...@oursite.com, they'll
type www.custo...@oursite.com instead (often misspelling
"customer" and/or "service" as well). I notice because I get the
wildcard redirects for mail to unknown addresses at various work-related
domains, and end up having to forward the mail to the place it would
have gone directly if the luser had typed the address right in the first
place.

Nicolai P. Zwar

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 7:29:29 PM9/27/03
to
Adrienne wrote:


> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"? What's so
> difficult about saying the correct thing?

When has advertising ever been about saying the correct thing?

--
Nicolai Zwar
http://www.nicolaizwar.com

Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 10:38:28 PM9/27/03
to
Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com> wrote:
> In article <Xns9402D5A9469D...@207.115.63.158>,
> arb...@sbcglobal.net says...
>> > When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.
>> No, I don't see myself doing it.

FTR I don't see myself clicking on things, either. I don't visualize
anything at all when the television or radio says "click on www dot
something dot com". Instead, I tend to yell at the device issuing the
offensively stupid suggestion.



> You are not typical. The people in this forum are not typical web
> users.

It's not possible to know how typical or atypical one of us might be
without observing our usage patterns.

> You are not typical. You
> have a better knowledge of how the web works. You distinguish between
> "go to" and "click on" They don't.

"Click on" implies that one has the means to activate an icon or
hyperlink at the moment.

I have spent many hours of my life tutoring new users, so I'm speaking
from experience here. If you tell a user to click on something, he will
look for that something in his browser window, and then on his desktop.
I've never seen a user, when told to click on something, choose to
enter text into the location input ("bar") of his browser.

"Click on" in the context of this discussion is marketdroid blather.
The fact that it's ubiquitous doesn't make it right -- any more than
referring to crackers as hackers makes that usage right. If your news
reader will allow you to, click on the following URL:

http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-20030927.html

Mark Jones

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 11:52:07 PM9/27/03
to
"Art Sackett" <usenet...@artsackett.com> wrote in message
news:bl5hj...@enews2.newsguy.com...

> Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com> wrote:
> > In article <Xns9402D5A9469D...@207.115.63.158>,
> > arb...@sbcglobal.net says...
> >> > When they say "click on" you see your self doing it.
> >> No, I don't see myself doing it.
>
> FTR I don't see myself clicking on things, either. I don't visualize
> anything at all when the television or radio says "click on www dot
> something dot com". Instead, I tend to yell at the device issuing the
> offensively stupid suggestion.
>
> > You are not typical. The people in this forum are not typical web
> > users.
>
> It's not possible to know how typical or atypical one of us might be
> without observing our usage patterns.
I hope you are atypical if you yell at the TV for something
that does not matter.


Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 27, 2003, 11:59:44 PM9/27/03
to
In article <mesnews.dc997d39...@seeschloss.net>, adresse-
n...@seeschloss.net says...

> > See the first line, because they "see themselves" doing it.
> But how can you see yourself clicking on a website ??
> You imagine the site opened in Internet Explorer, and
> yourself randomly clicking on the page ??

Exactly. You can't see anything when listening to a radio ad, so why do
they make elaborate setups for commercials? Because the listener is
using his or her "imagination" to fill in the blanks. So when they hear
"just click on www.site.com" the use their "imagination" and see them
selves clicking on link to the site.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 12:06:07 AM9/28/03
to
In article <bl5hj...@enews2.newsguy.com>, usenet...@artsackett.com
says...

> FTR I don't see myself clicking on things, either. I don't visualize
> anything at all when the television or radio says "click on www dot
> something dot com". Instead, I tend to yell at the device issuing the
> offensively stupid suggestion.

You need therapy...

> It's not possible to know how typical or atypical one of us might be
> without observing our usage patterns.

Actually from reading the posts and observing you can tell that the
majority here are not your typical web users.

> "Click on" implies that one has the means to activate an icon or
> hyperlink at the moment.
>
> I have spent many hours of my life tutoring new users, so I'm speaking
> from experience here.

Then you are familiar with telling them the difference between click and
click click....

> "Click on" in the context of this discussion is marketdroid blather.

Exactly

> The fact that it's ubiquitous doesn't make it right -- any more than
> referring to crackers as hackers makes that usage right. If your news
> reader will allow you to, click on the following URL:

And it does not make it wrong either.
--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

PeterMcC

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 4:57:33 AM9/28/03
to
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
> Adrienne wrote:
>
>> Why can't commericial writers just say "Go to www.example.com"?
>> What's so difficult about saying the correct thing?
>
> Because ads are written by Marketing Types, and, almost by definition,
> Marketing Types are drooling morons. I think a frontal lobotomy is
> one of the prerequisites to a degree in marketing.

Just a small niggle - Friday, my daughter handed in her dissertation - the
last piece of work for her marketing MA after a year of intense work during
which she has come to the perspective that her degree will be best used in
the field of consumer rights. I can't speak for the rest of them but I know
of one who isn't a drooling moron.

And now that I've written it, I'm not that happy about "drooling moron"...
Is it "drooling", the inability to swallow all the saliva that one produces,
as sometimes occurs in stroke victims amongst others, or "moron", someone
with a devastating mental incapacity, that you think makes the phrase a
useful insult?

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

kchayka

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 6:41:39 AM9/28/03
to

But where did that link come from in the first place? Or is it expected
to somehow just magically appear on their home page?

--
To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
address is considered spam and automatically deleted.

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 8:38:14 AM9/28/03
to
In article <3f76bc07$1...@news.sihope.com>, kcha-...@sihope.com says...

> But where did that link come from in the first place? Or is it expected
> to somehow just magically appear on their home page?

It's their "imagination" it does not matter where the link to click on
comes from.


--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

kchayka

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 9:54:01 AM9/28/03
to
Whitecrest wrote:

> In article <3f76bc07$1...@news.sihope.com>, kcha-...@sihope.com says...
>> But where did that link come from in the first place? Or is it expected
>> to somehow just magically appear on their home page?
>
> It's their "imagination" it does not matter where the link to click on
> comes from.

The point I was trying to make is that there is no link, nor is there
likely to ever be a link. Can't click on what isn't there, even if you
_can_ imagine yourself doing it. Anyone naive enough to take the ad
literally is going to look for a link but never find it. I can picture
thousands of AOL users trying right now...

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 10:38:40 AM9/28/03
to
In article <3f76...@news.sihope.com>, kcha-...@sihope.com says...

> The point I was trying to make is that there is no link, nor is there
> likely to ever be a link. Can't click on what isn't there, even if you
> _can_ imagine yourself doing it. Anyone naive enough to take the ad
> literally is going to look for a link but never find it. I can picture
> thousands of AOL users trying right now...

The existence or non existence of the actual or fictional link is
completely irrelevant. The words are not meant to be taken literally.
It is an ad.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 5:43:27 PM9/28/03
to
Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com> wrote:

> You need therapy...

In addition to web designer and usability expert, you're also a
clinical pychologist? I'm impressed.

> Actually from reading the posts and observing you can tell that the
> majority here are not your typical web users.

No you can't. You can tell that the majority here give partially
correct answers to questions typically asked by hobbyist web page
authors. How that relates to their web usage is not knowable without
deeper research.

> Then you are familiar with telling them the difference between click and
> click click....

Nope. I've never heard the term "click click" before now.

> And it does not make it wrong either.

What makes it wrong is that the person speaking to us via radio or
television is suggesting that we click on a hyperlink when there is
no such hyperlink available to us.

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 7:34:31 PM9/28/03
to
In article <bl7kl...@enews2.newsguy.com>, usenet...@artsackett.com
says...

> > Actually from reading the posts and observing you can tell that the
> > majority here are not your typical web users.
> No you can't. You can tell that the majority here give partially
> correct answers to questions typically asked by hobbyist web page
> authors. How that relates to their web usage is not knowable without
> deeper research.

Your kidding right? Flash usage? Client scripting? You could easily name
those in this forum that use them and those that don't for their
personal surfing. Heck just look at this thread and you can find that
out. People in this forum don't hide how they browse.

> > Then you are familiar with telling them the difference between click and
> > click click....
> Nope. I've never heard the term "click click" before now.

Proof that there are many ways to teach.

> What makes it wrong is that the person speaking to us via radio or
> television is suggesting that we click on a hyperlink when there is
> no such hyperlink available to us.

And I say it invokes the listeners imagination.

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 8:16:59 PM9/28/03
to
Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com> wrote:

> Your kidding right?

The most important thing to understand is how little you truly know.

>> Nope. I've never heard the term "click click" before now.
>
> Proof that there are many ways to teach.

I asked my 15 year old daughter, she says she's never heard of "click
click" either, not even in the many computer related courses she's had
throughout her so-called education.

If "click click" means double-click, I'd expect many to find such
talking-down to be offensive.

> And I say it invokes the listeners imagination.

You're free to say anything you wish, of course.

'Scuse me while I flambibulate my humongous gonkulator...

Mark Parnell

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 8:52:21 PM9/28/03
to
Art Sackett wrote:
>
> 'Scuse me while I flambibulate my humongous gonkulator...

Shhh! Don't tell brucie about your humongous gonkulator...

--

Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au


Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 28, 2003, 9:34:28 PM9/28/03
to
Mark Parnell <webm...@clarkecomputers.com.au> wrote:

> Shhh! Don't tell brucie about your humongous gonkulator...

Okay, I'll put it in the cone of silence. :-)

Whitecrest

unread,
Sep 29, 2003, 6:25:37 PM9/29/03
to
In article <bl827...@enews1.newsguy.com>, usenet...@artsackett.com
says...

> > Shhh! Don't tell brucie about your humongous gonkulator...
> Okay, I'll put it in the cone of silence. :-)

Well knowledge of the cone of silence
(http://www.cinerhama.com/getsmart/innovations.html) give away your
age....

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Art Sackett

unread,
Sep 30, 2003, 12:40:10 AM9/30/03
to
Whitecrest <white...@zipzap.com> wrote:

> Well knowledge of the cone of silence
> (http://www.cinerhama.com/getsmart/innovations.html) give away your
> age....

And knowledge of the gonkulator doesn't? :D

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages