Saddam’s Cyber Palace
Saddam’s Cyber Palace is a satirical political humor site. Even though this site’s politics are opposite of some of the other sites we’ve reviewed, the results were pretty much the same.
CONTENT – 4.7
“The concept could have been funny, if he had actually written funny journal entries every few days or so. But posting other people's cartoons and only writing your own posts every few weeks is pretty lame.”
“I don't get it. This blog is supposed to be written by Saddam Hussein? If that's the case, then why run cartoons lampooning Islam which Hussein would never do? It's a unique idea for a blog, but it should be consistent in voice. That being said, most of the content isn't original, and I didn't find much of it funny.”
“A very good idea that just wasn’t done very well.”
“I did enjoy the post about the virgins (aka nuns).”
“This number would be higher if more than half the posts weren't rehashed political cartoons.”
“I usually hate sites that try to be funny by focusing on politics. It’s really, really difficult to get it right. This one doesn’t do it either, but it’s still better than most of the other sites we’ve reviewed.”
DESIGN – 3.3
“A little too much black.”
“The font in the posts is a little small and difficult to read. The black background on the whole page is also distracting with light text. This is usually personal preference, but that's what I'm getting paid to review. The score would be higher if the posts themselves had a different background color to make them more individualized.”
“Awful. Yellow, orange, cream, and turquoise type?! It's a difficult-to-read mess. No attempt was made at all to reflect any Saddam Hussein ‘flavor.’ Completely blown opportunity to pick-up on design elements from Saddam's actual palaces.”
“This designs sucks.”
“What an abortion! I would have the designer killed.”
QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 5.7
“I'm hitting the middle here, because I can't tell what is original and what is copied. Pretty inconsistent.”
“He's supposed to be writing as Saddam Hussein but he crosses back and forth so you can't really tell who he's writing as sometimes.”
“Not much writing. What little there is isn’t too bad, but nothing special.”
INTANGIBLES – 4.0
“It won't load. I'm getting a big black screen, that's it.”
“So many things bother me here, but the stupid poll about Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock takes the cake. Why? What has that got to do with Hussein?”
“Middle of the road ... can't think of anything that pops out at me.”
“Lots of ads and ad-ons. The real person behind this satirical site is presumably against the war – which is great – but the side panel is just too cluttered.”
FREQUENCY – 1.0
“Saddam used to post more often, but his current incarceration has slowed his posting habits.”
WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 14% Yes
“Maybe.”
“Yes, if he updated it more regularly.”
“No, I regret having seen it once.”
“No, he needs to post more often.”
OVERALL – 51.3
CONTENT – 4.7
“The concept could have been funny, if he had actually written funny journal entries every few days or so. But posting other people's cartoons and only writing your own posts every few weeks is pretty lame.”
“I don't get it. This blog is supposed to be written by Saddam Hussein? If that's the case, then why run cartoons lampooning Islam which Hussein would never do? It's a unique idea for a blog, but it should be consistent in voice. That being said, most of the content isn't original, and I didn't find much of it funny.”
“A very good idea that just wasn’t done very well.”
“I did enjoy the post about the virgins (aka nuns).”
“This number would be higher if more than half the posts weren't rehashed political cartoons.”
“I usually hate sites that try to be funny by focusing on politics. It’s really, really difficult to get it right. This one doesn’t do it either, but it’s still better than most of the other sites we’ve reviewed.”
DESIGN – 3.3
“A little too much black.”
“The font in the posts is a little small and difficult to read. The black background on the whole page is also distracting with light text. This is usually personal preference, but that's what I'm getting paid to review. The score would be higher if the posts themselves had a different background color to make them more individualized.”
“Awful. Yellow, orange, cream, and turquoise type?! It's a difficult-to-read mess. No attempt was made at all to reflect any Saddam Hussein ‘flavor.’ Completely blown opportunity to pick-up on design elements from Saddam's actual palaces.”
“This designs sucks.”
“What an abortion! I would have the designer killed.”
QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 5.7
“I'm hitting the middle here, because I can't tell what is original and what is copied. Pretty inconsistent.”
“He's supposed to be writing as Saddam Hussein but he crosses back and forth so you can't really tell who he's writing as sometimes.”
“Not much writing. What little there is isn’t too bad, but nothing special.”
INTANGIBLES – 4.0
“It won't load. I'm getting a big black screen, that's it.”
“So many things bother me here, but the stupid poll about Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock takes the cake. Why? What has that got to do with Hussein?”
“Middle of the road ... can't think of anything that pops out at me.”
“Lots of ads and ad-ons. The real person behind this satirical site is presumably against the war – which is great – but the side panel is just too cluttered.”
FREQUENCY – 1.0
“Saddam used to post more often, but his current incarceration has slowed his posting habits.”
WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 14% Yes
“Maybe.”
“Yes, if he updated it more regularly.”
“No, I regret having seen it once.”
“No, he needs to post more often.”
OVERALL – 51.3
posted by BlogLaughs at
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home