I was photographing in the last months – please tell me what they tell you:

Tell me if you like them – i love to discuss the photos with you! And support my: ITRIO HD W100B
OK, I’ve given it some time. This is not about resistance to change for the sake of nostalgia. I submitted my first article to AC at the end of Oct. ’08. How damn nostalgic could I get? But it’s time the Powers That Be in the decision making department at AC take a look at our valid complaints! There is no building outside of which we can carry signs saying “AC Unfair to Writers!” and march around gathering public support, or maybe rotten tomatoes freely tossed at us by passers-by. Revolutionaries aren’t always popular. So we have to resort to that legendary Power of the Pen, or the updated Power of the Keyboard, which we’ve heard is mightier than the sword. That’s good, because I suck at swordfighting!
To acknowledge that not all change is bad, I freely admit the font seems easier to read, and I’m thrilled that our little article summaries on the bio page can be read without eyestrain. I think the photos, even the bio pics & avatars are clearer quality. So thank-you to the Powers That Be for those helpful changes.
Moving on to the What Were They Thinking category:
# 1 Peeve on my personal peeve list is the tiny little photos that are supposed to illustrate something meaningful about the article we print. Not only were they put through the wash & shrink cycle, but what little bit does show is a section of the photo that may not even give a clue about its subject. Case in point. An article about our Lhasa apso passing on Christmas Eve had a photo of the dogs with me in front of the Christmas tree. But all that showed in the teeny portion of the picture was the top of the tree. And there are AC writers who still don’t know to click that tiny box (or X or whatever it is) in the upper left corner of the picture. It takes that click to open the photo to full size. Only then can the reader see the caption and find out whether there are more pictures to be seen. An article may be one page long, but it can have multiple photos attached. Some of us spend time & effort to attach an image we feel is integral to the story. Learning that readers saw only the top, never read the caption and had no idea there were more photos, is maddening and frustrating. The writers feel they’ve wasted their time. And the readers have been cheated. Imagine how lost non-AC fans are with no guidance!
#2 Peeve is the flashing ads in the midst of our text. We all understand AC’s need for advertiser support. But to give the advertiser not just prominence, but dominance over the page, is wrong! This should be a symbiotic relationship. Writers need a place to be read. Advertisers need space to be seen. They need places like AC, and AC needs the finances that advertising brings. But AC does not exist without writers! To place colorful flashing ads that are many times larger than our own attached photos, and to keep them bouncing and changing within the body of an article, is so intrusive as to be downright rude! It’s demeaning to the work, and in the case of poetry, which often requires a specific formatting to be seen as it was intended, wrapping and separating lines around a huge frenetic ad is plain destructive.
Today I was reading Morag Mortimer-Smythe’s Valentine poem on AC. A photo of two lovely roses accompanies it. But as my eyes struggled to follow the flow of his words through the cumbersome AC format, I was greeted by a huge hideous video ad for the horror film, The Unborn. Right smack dab in his Valentine poem, looming larger than Morag’s photo or text. And when I clicked the little box to enlarge his photo to full, the damn ad leaped in front of it! I had to sword fight with it just to view the roses! This ad placement could not have been more inappropriate.
Oh wait… yes, it could. When I was reading Death Dream by Norman Rubin on AC, a story about a very serious and real topic, told as an eerie ghost story, I was startled when some moronic guy with a big toothy grin suddenly leapt into my view and continued jumping up and down trying to sell me a freakin’ cell phone! What AC is doing is akin to a book-reading at which a hyperactive child is allowed to run back and forth in front of the author, screeching “Look at ME!” and waving large balloons, while the audience sits helplessly straining to hear the author read.
To read an article that details this issue in a much more humorous way, check out Linda Johnson’s Difficulties Detected in New AC Format (1-5-09). Look for the giant eye ball, but to see it in full with caption, click the tiny box in the upper left corner of picture…
# 3 Peeve: It’s annoying as hell that once you’ve enlarged the picture to full size, it covers part of the text, making it impossible to read a story and refer your eyes to the picture at the same time! This is a crazy illogical system, and I refuse to believe a better compromise can’t be found by the clever Powers That Be at AC! Come on AC… respect the text!
#4 Peeve is the removal of the writer’s photo/avatar that should be displayed with the articles. I can’t speak for other CP’s on this, but I’m hooked on the visual cue of seeing the image I’ve come to associate with each writer. Helps me keep track of who I’m reading and even helps me remember which article was done by which writer when I can recall their image at the top. Maybe I have brain problems, but it makes sense to me. In my mind Morag is a lounging nude woman (though his mate assures us he’s a guy). And jpsixbear is a colorful little mug, while Lisa Parris is a cute blonde cartoon. I need to see those images on their articles, and I don’t want to have to hover the arrow over their names to make it appear! Which brings me to:
#5 Peeve…finding your way to the list of all other articles by that CP. Just as not all of us knew to click the tiny box in the upper left corner of photos, not all readers know if you hover over the writer’s name and click on the image that appears, you will be magically transported to that writer’s page with bio and a neatly formatted summary of each of the articles by that Content Producer. Same as clicking on anyone’s photo will take you to their content page.
#6 Peeve… the lowly Comment section, now hidden from view. There may still be AC writers wondering what happened to Comments. I know that most of my non-AC fans thought it was eliminated. Couldn’t AC put “Comment Section Below” at the bottom of the article page? Then readers might scroll down until they find it. Work with us here!
I’m one of the least technologically competent writers on AC. I needed tons of guidance to work up to this much understanding of the New AC. But if AC wants to encourage new writers, try making AC more user-friendly. Or even just less user-obnoxious!
1) AC could include a notation above every attached photo telling readers to click box in upper left corner. Voila… entire photo with caption appears!
2) Add the note at the end to scroll down to Comments.
3) Even the bratty flashing ads could be given a prominent spot removed from the body of the article.
Listen, O’ Powers That Be at AC. I want to make use of this writing playground. I have cyber friends here now. We bring you our gifts, even if they’re not always gold, and you ask us to share our playground with the loud boisterous bullies you need for your own reasons. I believe we can still work together, if you will take our concerns seriously, but the big loud bullies are causing a lot of hurt and anger on the playground. Can you help us out? Who monitors the playground at AC? Can we talk before some of us walk?
More here: Brians Weblog
Kitchis Weblog
Nevaehs Weblog
Brennans Blog
Welfords Weblog
Recent Comments