Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Feedback on www.userland.com?

Author:Dave Winer
Posted:9/4/1999; 4:39:07 PM
Topic:www.userland.com
Msg #:10572 (In response to 10564)
Prev/Next:10571 / 10573

One reader said we should put all the "philosophy stuff" on www.userland.com down one level, and asked us to look at the following sites for comparison:

http://www.metrowerks.com/

http://www.adobe.com/

http://www.apple.com/

http://www.lotus.com/

http://www.ibm.com/

http://www.microsoft.com/

http://www.mcafee.com/

http://www.compusanet.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/

What do all those sites have in common? People who read them probably know who the company is and what they do. On the other hand, I'd bet that most people who visit userland.com don't have a clue what we do, because we have kept it so well hidden. Up till now all the userland.com site talked about with any eloquence, was Frontier. But as you can see, while Frontier is at the heart, software-wise of what we do, software is the enabler, it is not the purpose of UserLand. That has to be said and if people are going to UnderStand what UserLand is, they'll have to read it.

My feeling is that that extra level of hierarchy can come later. I want people to know this is an editorial, software and community thing and how all the elements relate to each other. The only way I know how to do that is with words. Not saying it can't be done graphically, but I am a writer, and almost all the expression you'll find on this site follows that pattern.

So far everyone seems to like it but this one person (who I'm not going to name, no need to put them on the spot for having an opinion). I wonder if people agree or disagree? Did you read the whole story on the home page? If not, do you think you might next time you see a link to userland.com? Do you think it's too much for someone who knows nothing about userland.com? (This might be hard to imagine, given that this question is on the DG and presumably everyone here is at least somewhat familiar with UserLand.)

BTW, the reason I think our site *should* be different from the others is that our site actually is different. There is a connection between all the different pieces, and we actually know what it is, and can explain it. It's in the vintner analogy. We dig news. We make software for distribution and publishing of news. We want to attract other news hounds and sell them software and services.

I went to the vision pages on all those sites (and a few others) and thought in every case What Garbage! They hired some marketing consultant to figure out what their vision is.

Turned around another way, does anyone have a site whose vision statement is in the *right* place or that they've managed to trip over, and found it inspirational, something you'd want to be part of?

One of my teachers, Ries & Trout, quoted one of their teachers, David Ogilvie of Ogilvie & Mather. A young ad guy was presenting to a client, explaining the concepts by reading the text he had scribbled on the back of each ad. Ogilvie, then an old man and dean of the advertising world, stood up and reversed all of his ads. "That stuff belongs in front not in back." In other words, ads should state their purpose directly. There's a reason this story stayed with me. I like promotional material that tells it like it is, not fluffy crap marketing consultants write. Is there room for style? Of course! But not at the expense of clarity of communication. Is writing a valid way to communicate? Yes it is.

Remember this is an Editorial Environment. ;->

Thanks for listening™.



There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:52:24 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.