He Looks Like …
Much like The Best Page In The Universe, He Looks Like … would have scored much better if there were more regular posts.
“There hasn't been a new post since April. Are you sure this blogger did not abandon their blog?”
“I'm wondering if the blog author is ever going to keep up with this blog regularly. It has a lot of potential, and with frequent posts and a nice template design I can really see this one taking off.”
CONTENT – 6.9
“Who doesn’t like making fun of people? This shit is funny. Fantastic idea for a blog.”
“The posts are great! The simple concept really works for a blog. All of the posts are short enough to stay funny, and long enough to throw in as many witty and fictitious back-story lines as the author can.”
“I enjoyed the crazy stories that captioned the photo. It's too bad the author hasn't posted something new in 3 months. She's probably too busy with her book deal.”
“I could see where others would find the content amusing. I might, if I had a few drinks in me. However, I didn't even chuckle. This format has been done to death. Besides, my own imagination is far more intriguing than any story concocted here.”
“What a great idea for a blog! Funny as hell!”
“This is a great idea, and one I've never seen before. I bow before the author for I am not worthy!”
DESIGN – 6.4
“Standard black blog format. Not a huge fan, but I like that she's kept it simple.”
“This is about the only sore spot for the whole blog. It's a crappy Blogger template, but it's still simple and easy to read (although white text on black background isn't my first choice). I originally gave this item a 3.5, but because the design didn't really detract from the rest of the blog, I changed it to an even 6.”
“Basic Blogger templates like this one don’t bother me too much. It’s mainly a photo blog with sarcastic cutlines. A header across the top could do wonders for the design.”
QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 8.5
“Well written, very few mistakes, and the posts read just like they would if they were captions or short entries in a serious magazine.”
“The writing and her grammar are pretty good. Anything questionable is usually done to enhance the writing. Like ‘I ate m'hat’ or 'that weird feller who wears 'em roadkill on his hat.’ On this blog, her writing is her strength.”
“I love the writing. Very good.”
INTANGIBLES – 5.8
“Google ads!!! And the ‘we’ stuff in the title? Who is this ‘we’ she speaks of? Does she have people author her work for her?”
I just love the idea. The author has a great time writing the posts, and it shows. I know we reviewers don't really cover this, but the only real detractor besides the template is that the frequency of the posts can be very erratic, and there hasn't been a new post since April 19, 2006.
“I hate the Google ads, but there’s not too much else to complain about.”
“The request for photos for a book is kind of lame. This is probably more of a design problem, but it really looks bad. This is a great idea for a blog, but I don’t know if it’s a great idea for a book.”
FREQUENCY – 0.0
“No posts since April 19, 2006 warrants no points in this category.”
WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 57% Yes
“No. It looks like the author doesn't post on a regular basis, which is a shame.”
“I'll probably stop back by once a week or so.”
“Not even if this was the only blog left on the Internet. I might be forced to watch (ack!) television instead!”
“I would if they hadn't stopped writing.”
“Yup! Clever”
“Definitely, as long as the author actually posts again.”
“I’ll say yes, just hoping she comes back.”
OVERALL – 74.4
“I tried to laugh. Really I did. I just didn't find it funny. Her heart was in the right place. Her funnybone, however, seems to be on hiatus. Maybe it's just me. She seems to have loyal followers. I just won't be one of them.”
“This is a very good, quality blog. I'd like to make it my regular read. It's a pity that it hasn't been updated in a while.”
“There hasn't been a new post since April. Are you sure this blogger did not abandon their blog?”
“I'm wondering if the blog author is ever going to keep up with this blog regularly. It has a lot of potential, and with frequent posts and a nice template design I can really see this one taking off.”
CONTENT – 6.9
“Who doesn’t like making fun of people? This shit is funny. Fantastic idea for a blog.”
“The posts are great! The simple concept really works for a blog. All of the posts are short enough to stay funny, and long enough to throw in as many witty and fictitious back-story lines as the author can.”
“I enjoyed the crazy stories that captioned the photo. It's too bad the author hasn't posted something new in 3 months. She's probably too busy with her book deal.”
“I could see where others would find the content amusing. I might, if I had a few drinks in me. However, I didn't even chuckle. This format has been done to death. Besides, my own imagination is far more intriguing than any story concocted here.”
“What a great idea for a blog! Funny as hell!”
“This is a great idea, and one I've never seen before. I bow before the author for I am not worthy!”
DESIGN – 6.4
“Standard black blog format. Not a huge fan, but I like that she's kept it simple.”
“This is about the only sore spot for the whole blog. It's a crappy Blogger template, but it's still simple and easy to read (although white text on black background isn't my first choice). I originally gave this item a 3.5, but because the design didn't really detract from the rest of the blog, I changed it to an even 6.”
“Basic Blogger templates like this one don’t bother me too much. It’s mainly a photo blog with sarcastic cutlines. A header across the top could do wonders for the design.”
QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 8.5
“Well written, very few mistakes, and the posts read just like they would if they were captions or short entries in a serious magazine.”
“The writing and her grammar are pretty good. Anything questionable is usually done to enhance the writing. Like ‘I ate m'hat’ or 'that weird feller who wears 'em roadkill on his hat.’ On this blog, her writing is her strength.”
“I love the writing. Very good.”
INTANGIBLES – 5.8
“Google ads!!! And the ‘we’ stuff in the title? Who is this ‘we’ she speaks of? Does she have people author her work for her?”
I just love the idea. The author has a great time writing the posts, and it shows. I know we reviewers don't really cover this, but the only real detractor besides the template is that the frequency of the posts can be very erratic, and there hasn't been a new post since April 19, 2006.
“I hate the Google ads, but there’s not too much else to complain about.”
“The request for photos for a book is kind of lame. This is probably more of a design problem, but it really looks bad. This is a great idea for a blog, but I don’t know if it’s a great idea for a book.”
FREQUENCY – 0.0
“No posts since April 19, 2006 warrants no points in this category.”
WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 57% Yes
“No. It looks like the author doesn't post on a regular basis, which is a shame.”
“I'll probably stop back by once a week or so.”
“Not even if this was the only blog left on the Internet. I might be forced to watch (ack!) television instead!”
“I would if they hadn't stopped writing.”
“Yup! Clever”
“Definitely, as long as the author actually posts again.”
“I’ll say yes, just hoping she comes back.”
OVERALL – 74.4
“I tried to laugh. Really I did. I just didn't find it funny. Her heart was in the right place. Her funnybone, however, seems to be on hiatus. Maybe it's just me. She seems to have loyal followers. I just won't be one of them.”
“This is a very good, quality blog. I'd like to make it my regular read. It's a pity that it hasn't been updated in a while.”
posted by BlogLaughs at
Friday, August 04, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home