Pointless Drivel

A few of our reviewers really didn’t like Pointless Drivel, but the majority helped push Mr. Fab’s blog into our Top-20.

CONTENT – 7.4
“Almost always hilarious.”

“Original and pretty humorous. Nothing that's written is really an out an out joke, more like funny commentary about the author's life. If the author had gotten me to laugh out loud, I probably would have given him a score higher than 7.5. For me, the funniest posts came from his 'I'm a Dork' category ... the guy is definitely not afraid to poke fun at himself, which is always good in a humor blog.”

“Mr. Fab explains his content in spades in his title: Pointless Drivel. Any blogger who still participates in "Six ways I'm like an 80s hair band while I'm taking a piss" type of memes really shouldn't be on this list at all.”

“Mr. Fab is definitely a looney guy. I like that. He updates constantly and is always doing something different, from video blogging to audio blogging to giveaways.”

“I haven’t watched his videos or listened to any audio (I have virus paranoia), so I’m only rating the written posts. It’s funny. Not the greatest, but not bad at all.”

“Pointless Drivel can be over the top sometimes. Then again, Mr. Fab has received nearly 100,000 hits in just over a year. He's definitely loved.”

“The posts about Mrs. Fab are probably my favorite!”

DESIGN – 8.2
"Professional, unique, and gives a good idea of the mindset of this particular blogger."

“Terrific! Original and engaging. As a writer, Mr. Fab makes a fabulous graphic designer.”

“The color is a little dark.”

“The top image is a little large for my taste, but a lot of blogs are going that route nowadays. I like the color scheme, but it does make it a little difficult to read the light gray/tan text in the sidebar. The design is not cluttered and emphasizes the content above everything else.”

“Everything is neat and tidy and easy to read. No complaints here!”

“He gets an ‘A’ for effort, but the sum of all of these parts is a little flat. The design has a lot of features I like but it’s not organized very well. I don’t know, it just feels kind of clunky. The brown sidebar and the fonts kind of suck. Maybe that’s it.”

QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 7.9
“Good use of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. He’s egomaniacally hysterical.”

“Mr. Fab needs to turn on his cliché alert. His writing is just barely above mediocre, which is more than I can say for 98 percent of the blogs out there in the blogosphere, but still, hardly worthy of breaking the Top-50 humor blogs. Or the Top-500, for that matter. I'm sure if I look hard enough I'll find smileys and IM-speak (LOL, ROTFL, TTYL) on this blog, but I'm already bored.”

“The author is a writer, and it shows in his posts. Well written, but I did notice a few grammar mistakes here and there, which did not detract from the content. Not that I can judge, since I definitely don't write as well.”

“My English teacher would swoon.”

“The writing is a little too ‘bloggy’ for my tastes sometimes, but it’s OK.”

INTANGIBLES – 5.9
“His videos are hysterical, especially the one where he's demonstrating the perfect way to consume a banana, ending with his wife spooging blue cheese dressing on his face.”

“I tried to parse the sentence, ‘Who loved me latest?’ but my head exploded.”

“The sidebar is really long, but at least each section is hidden within an expandable container, so it doesn't really bother me.”

“For some reason this blog didn't speak to me. It's well written, contains decent humor, but for some reason I just didn't connect with it. That's why I only gave it a score of 6 in this category. A subjective assessment, but I don't know how else to address this score. The fact that he posted his own original musical entries kept me from scoring this less than a 5.”

“He’s a successful blog whore.”

“Another shining example of a blog with no ads.”

“I like the voice of this blogger. Sometimes his posts tend to be a little too long, but I have attention span problems.”

“I like the variety of his posts.”

“The sidebar is just too cluttered. I’d wipe it out and start again.”

“His profile picture always reminds me of Michael Jackson from the ‘Smooth Crimnal’ video. Shum on! He, he!”

FREQUENCY – 10
“Mr. Fab posts at least once a day.”

WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 73% Yes
“I do, yet I haven't linked him on my side panel. Love his stuff, but he's like Dooce, he's on everyone's side panel.”

“Yes. I have read this blog on a regular basis since it's early days.”

“I think I'll stay over here on this side of the crime scene tape, thanks.”

“Possibly. I may read it every other week or so, but not on a daily basis.”

“I already do!”

“Yep.”

OVERALL – 85.1

To Do: 1. Get Hobby, 2. Floss

As one of our reviewers explained, “I don’t know if this blog is called ‘To Do: 1. Get Hobby, 2. Floss,’ or ‘Must Get Hobby.’ Both names are stupid but this is still one of the best humor blogs on the Internet.”

Needless to say, our reviewers loved this blog.

To Do: 1. Get Hobby, 2. Floss managed the second-highest score in our short, little history.

CONTENT – 8.8
“She is hysterical! How did I not find her before? I don't understand? She tells a great story with wry, dry humor. Nothing fluffy about it, just tell it like it is and screw you if you don't like it kind of attitude. Self-deprecating while being positively adorable! Hello? We have mutual friends! Why were we not introduced? I give her a 10 for being so real and so very human.”

“It kept me engaged enough to read past the first post.”

“Mist is consistently funny. Always a fun read with laugh-out-loud moments.”

“Interesting, but nothing really jumped out at me as hilarious.”

“I love her intelligent, wry, dry humor. I wish every blog was this entertaining.”

“God, I love Mist1. I don’t know if I can explain this but ‘I get her.' You know? She’s just really, really good.”

DESIGN – 7.1
[Mist1 did a redesign during our review period. Some of the scores and comments may reflect the older design.]

“Very simple, nice and clean. Some funky stuff going on in the sidebar, like large spaces between links and half-erased links, but nothing I would piss in her Cheerios over.”

“Nothing special here, just a bare bones template. But who cares, it's a great read!”

“Basic Blogger template.”

“It's the same style of template that I have, so how could I not love it?”

“Glad I checked back for another look. The new design is nice.”

QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 9.0
“Excellent writer with a wonderful sense of comedic timing. She can spell. I'm in love.”

“It kept me engaged, I just kept reading expecting ‘more.’ Now I don't know how much more, or what more, but I just expected more.”

“I didn't see any glaring errors.”

“She certainly knows her way around a sentence. She writes very well.”

“Good. Nothing here to make me shudder or wish for an editing button.”

“I don’t know much about her, but she writes in short paragraphs like a journalist. She needs to be writing this stuff for a newspaper or magazine instead of giving it away for free. I saw a couple of tiny mistakes but I’m still giving her a 10. Mist1 is a uniquely talented writer.”

INTANGIBLES – 8.8
“I cannot abide disingenuity, neither in writing nor in speech. Why b*tch instead of bitch? Why G*d instead of God? Do you think we don't know what the missing letters are? Are your children reading? If they are, do you think they don't know what the missing letters are?”

“Nothing to bitch about. She barely has a sidebar, let alone clutter. Nothing is blinking, flashing or asking me to pay for it. She has one lone blog award tucked neatly down at the bottom. How can someone who is so not an attention whore have so many readers? What am I doing wrong here?”

“She posts every day, which I like.”

“Good frequency of posts and an amazing number of comments. Makes me wish I had seen the previous blog that seems to have disappeared in the mists of time.”

“Perfect 10 in this category. I don’t like the name of this blog, but there is nothing here that upsets me in any way.”

“Jesus! Look at all those commenters!”

FREQUENCY – 10
“Mist1 makes a regular post every weekday.”

WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 78% Yes
“Already do!”

“As of today, she is on my blogroll.”

“Yes! Thanks for the new blog.”

“Doubtful.”

“Yes indeed, I have added it to my Bloglines.”

“Yes. I'll be checking back regularly.”

“I noticed you don’t use a lot of the standard yes/no comments. On this one, I’m saying yes. Mist1 kicks ass! How’s that?”

“No.”

OVERALL – 96.9

Gangstas & Hugs

The following comments are a testament to the fact that our reviewers have a variety of opinions about Gangstas & Hugs.

Of course, when that happens, the numbers end up being averaged somewhere in the middle.

CONTENT – 6.5
“There are only a handful of blogs I read on a regular basis, and Gangstas & Hugs is one of them. Mojotek has a knack for making me literally laugh out loud. I guess I have a soft spot for tasteless humor.”

“G&H contains a lot of unoriginal and borrowed humor from the web. Some of it is old content. Some of it is new and amusing. None of it, however, was created by the writer of G&H. It is pointless unless you don't like surfing YouTube, Fark, various news sources or other blogs. If you like your reading of the stupidest stuff on the Web condensed into one place...then G&H is for you.”

“There is a nice mix of post lengths. The post about diaper fetishes was pretty funny. Overall, good for a chuckle or two.”

“Unoriginal and sophomoric.”

“I don’t know what to say about the content. Every post is at least relatively funny, and different, but it doesn’t seem to have a coherent theme. This blog has promise, but I don’t know if I’d recommend it to everyone.”

“It was just interesting enough to be able to get through a lot of it without my mind wandering, but it still didn't contain anything I really wanted to read. He takes a lot of content from other sites and then comments on it, which is fine, but not in a way that is particularly interesting or funny to me. I am sure there is an audience for this blog, but I am just not part of it. “

“He makes the mistake of confusing mainstream misconceptions with common sense.”

“Mojotek is a funny man.”

“His slogan is ‘Where Humor Comes to Die.’ I don't think it dies here, but it's left arm is tingling.”

“It's an amusing little blog, but superficial. For example, here's a truly weird and disgusting discovery, a man with a human skull tattooed on his face. This presents all sorts of wonderful opportunities to write reflectively on the real or imagined life of this man; the state of our society that such a thing is tolerated (or perhaps it isn't). The possibilities are endless. Yet all Gangsta has to say about it is, ‘Look, isn't this weird?’ Well, yes it is, but .”

DESIGN – 6.6
“This blog keeps it simple design-wise and it's easy to navigate.”

“I liked it. It wasn't flashy, it wasn't dull. It is a Goldilocks template: just right.”

“The old design had too many features that wouldn’t load. This one is better, but still not great. It’s easier to navigate but it isn’t anything special. I’m giving it a solid 7.”

“The design is clean, reads like a newspaper and is free of blinkies, pop ups and loads of ads. It is also exceptionally boring.”

“It’s an original design, but is it really better than some of the Blogger templates?”

QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 6.5
“The quality of writing is conversational and light … which is nice, but none of it is actually original content. It is hard to judge someone’s grammar when they are quoting other sources.”

“Nothing stands out either way. It’s a solid 6.”

“No glaring mistakes. Maybe I should actually rate it little higher but I think I have been numbed by the general level of higher-end mediocrity.”

“He soured me right from the get-go when the first entry I read had the malapropism of stigmata for stigma.”

INTANGIBLES – 6.9
“I don’t like the ads or the comments in the sidebar, but both are done relatively tastefully. Not much to gripe about.”

“Aside from the few click throughs and two ads, I have nothing else to complain about.”

“Who knew they still made cassette tapes these days?”

“Just not my cup of tea.”

"I like any site that has an about page."

“The fact that Gangsta uses his ‘about’ page to promote his MySpace site says it all. If you're older than, say, 13, this blog is not for you.”

FREQUENCY – 7.0
“Mojotek averaged 3.5 posts a week the past year. [Thanks for listing totals in the archives.]”

WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 50% Yes
“No. I'm not a 12-year old boy.”

“Of course.”

“Nope”

“Already do.”

“No, I don't think so. Nothing grabbed me.”

“Yes, definitely.”

“N-to-the-O!”

“Sure. Love it.”

OVERALL – 74.0

Snarkywood

One of the first reviews for Snarkywood mentioned the premise of “snark as comedy.”

Apparently, not everyone finds snarky comments funny … and that sentiment lead to relatively mixed reviews for Snarkywood.

CONTENT – 7.0
“The concept of this blog does nothing for me. I have a strange feeling I would feel differently if the comments were actually funny. I went through every post and just barely chuckled. The more I define the word ‘snark’ in my own head, the more I realize it just does nothing for me.”

“I like the structure of this blog; photos of celebrities with short catty captions/comments. It's simple, yet entertaining.”

“This blog is hilarious! I love this sort of humor, it's right up my alley! I wish I could write for this blog, that's how great I think it is!”

“What the hell is this? Because it certainly isn't a blog. It's just a bunch of people making unfunny comments about celebrity photos. Maybe I'm just not in the mood, but I don't get it. But I give them points for effort, since they obviously waste a lot of time on this.”

"Hysterical entries. The snark on Hasselhoff is a must-read. Their penchant for hyperbole and grasp of metaphors makes reading this particular blog very engaging (On Whitney Houston: ‘She’s like a princess cut diamond with 76 facets of Crazy.’ [sic])”

“While this is not an original concept (I've seen it in a few magazines before) the execution is brilliant. These are all funny people.”

“I'm not a real fan of Hollywood gossip but this was funny. Good sense of humor and the collaboration makes it interesting.”

DESIGN – 6.9
“The design is simple with a nice use of photos. I don’t like the green or the font used for the tagline but the sidebar was clean and well done.”

“Needs a more custom masthead or layout, but other than that, it's near perfect.”

“Simple, uncluttered, clean, what's not to love?”

“Decent banner, but everything else is pretty dull. I expected a little more from an independent site.”

“The design is pretty clean and very green.”

“Ads. Yuck. Nice header though.”

QUALITY OF WRITING/GRAMMAR – 6.9
“Great compatibility between the writers. Good use of grammar, lexicon and punctuation.”

“The writing is witty and clever. Are those the same things? Oh, and damn funny too!”

“The writing is OK. Nothing special.”

“What I saw was pretty coherent.”

“Conversational. The use of slang is entertaining.”

INTANGIBLES – 6.3
“The only drawbacks are the ads and that they don't post often enough.”

“Google Ads are a scam. Are they actually making money with this?”

“They don't post every day. However, their posts are quali-TAY!”

“It was annoying to have to go to another page to find the archives.”

“The ads were not intrusive, but they were still there. The posts were a little long for me, especially since most of it wasn’t funny. The organization of the archives sucks.”

FREQUENCY – 1.0
“From what we can gather, the gang at Snarkywood averages a little better than one post a month.”

WOULD YOU READ THIS BLOG REGULARLY – 48% Yes
“They post so infrequently, I might add it to my Bloglines if they have a full feed. If not, no chance.”

“No. It’s not my kind of blog. It’s not clever or smart enough for me.”

“Yes! Hilarious stuff. I've already bookmarked it.”

“No, I read dlisted already.”

“I'd be foolish not to read this regularly. Into my bookmarks it goes!”

“No, I wouldn't read this regularly. Not my taste.”

“A thousand times yes. I just added it to my blogroll. Where has this blog been all my life?”

“No, not a fan of gossip pages.”

OVERALL – 74.4