A review would be appreciated

[workfaction]

This is a site about the work community and I was wondering what I could improve before I release it .. :)

http://www.workfaction.com

And we are not just looking for constructive criticism

[Doc C]

This is a non PowWeb hosted site. Please refer to this post (http://forum.powweb.com/showthread.php?t=49943) on the proper way to submit a site not hosted here. It is a sticky post located at the top of this forum.

Thank you.

[Valdrien]

I love the concept and everything looks good.

However, I'm not sure if this is just me or not but it took me a while to find the navigation buttons, I'm referring to the 'Workplace' 'Forums' etc buttons.

I really didn't notice them until I was about to close the page. I looked for them at first then i remembered you had 'beta' so I thought you didn't make them yet and when I was about to close the page I saw the buttons.

Maybe it's just me and getting used to my new monitor resolution though. :)

[workfaction]

This is a site about the work community and I was wondering what I could improve before I release it .. :)

http://www.workfaction.com

And we are not just looking for constructive criticism

Sorry :)

well workfaction is a non-PowWeb hosted site.
We would love the opinion of PowWeb users :)

Thank you

[YvetteKuhns]

I cannot get by the logo image. I looked at this yesterday and was confused. Why is someone standing on his head on top of another person? Then I thought they were laying down as if they were looking up at the clouds, but their heads overlap. Okay, is one facing up while the other is facing down? They can't be kissing unless those speech balloons say "smooch". :confused:

I glanced at the posts and this website looks like an entertainment site. Some people make personal posts that could get them into trouble if anyone who know the posters would see the posts. It reminds me of a party full of gossips who talk about others when they are not there. It could be a place to vent, but this looks like a tough site to moderate.

Is this supposed to be like an online Dear Abby? I don't recommend talking about your employers or coworkers on the Internet. This isn't a private chat. This is viewable to the public. I guess things are different these days. When I worked for someone else, if anyone said anything about another employee, you were in trouble. I reported a boss for stealing and had proof. Until they proved it, they gave ME a BIG hassle. This is not the dirty laundry your employer wants aired in public.

There are probably people who will enjoy sharing secrets here. There are others who will enjoy exposing people. Good luck with this. The home page definitely needs the site purpose defined and some basic rules. Many people don't read FAQ until after they read the home page and some don't read them at all!

Current work environments that try to attract and retain the best and brightest talent would also benefit by listening to what their employees
(past, present and future) have to say.

So.... you are already warning people that employers are going to read what employees say. And the employees are still honest or crazy enough to say things here?! :eek: They can post after they get their new jobs! :D

The ideas sounded good in theory, but as usual, people will post the rants and complaints instead of saying how great things are. If they were happy, they wouldn't post here unless they were sucking up. :D

Okay, sorry for teasing you about the site. I think I have been in THIS forum too long to know how some people are. People can be anonymous on the Internet and will say things here that they might not say in person. It's like my husband honking and waving while he drives. He is normally shy at first, but he can flirt when he is somewhere where people do not know him.

[phlembol]

I cannot get by the logo image.

It did stop me when I first saw it. I'm not sure if that is a good thing or not. Could be either. It said to me, "put your heads together and talk."

[Doc C]

Isn't there that old saying "On the internet, no one knows you're a dog" ?

Oh and by the way, the correct spelling is TOMORROW not TOMMOROW. (At least here in the states :D)

[workfaction]

YvetteKuhns :

lol... first thank you for the enormous review.
The logo represents people sharing ideas - connecting with their mind.
Well it isnt just about venting its about giving a little more respect and worth to the worker.
Yup, it might get tough to moderate, so i have our users flag content and later on give contributing users an option to mark as spam.
Yes, its open to public viewing, also users dont need to sign on to post reviews, thus they have anonymity.
Also, users can post about past employeers to warn or encourage future employees and also, expose the employeer for what he/she is. Deserving employeers can use this to their advantage :)

phlembol :

Spot on !

Doc C:

lol... well yeah its still in beta, its excusable non ?
ive grown up with english english (from england) and lived in different parts of the world so i think it confuses me :)

well i just changed the tabs on the site. Next would be a better start page which should get the concept across better, I hope.

Well thanks for the reviews guys :D

Any tips on racking up users ? cant seem to think of a strategy....

[Kitchensink108]

The first thing my eyes saw were the "Yesterday/today/tomorrow" images, and my first thought was seriously "What?" I don't entirely understand the purpose of those images, and they're drawing attention away from...more informative things, like the text beneath them.

The only other thing I have to say is, on the Work Places page, why is the text box on the opposite side of the screen as the submit button?

[Neat Pete]

The Logo. Everyone says they can't understand it. To me it looks like conjoined twins before their operation.

But no. We are told what it represents and then it's obvious is it not??

We went through all this logo business last year while reviewing http://www.maltaproducts.com/ where the logo looks like a vinyl surf float. It glints like vinyl, and it's coloured like it's plastic. But no, goodness no, it's the Eye of Osiris. Even Wikipedia knows that one. Of course, I should have known it was the Eye of Osiris.

That logo is still there, along with vast amounts of repetition and clutter, and heaps of minor usability issues. First time visitors probably think the logo is an abstract painting, done by a chimp on loan from the San Diego zoo.

There is quite a big discussion currently on the net between "branding" and the requirements for web site design and putting the correct keywords on each page so that search engines will correctly index the page. There is no point in having your brand name indexed, if nobody ever searches using than brand name. Same for logos, if nobody can figure out what the logo means, you might as well have a photo, a sketch or artwork, or a piece of clip art.

It's no small wonder that so many companies opt for an abstract logo or just stick to the name of their company. Like Kellogs. One company, Nike, had a great abstract logo but then tried foolishly to give the logo a name and explain its meaning.

[YvetteKuhns]

I think we all agree that the logo was confusing at first glance. If you have to explain it, it is not obvious. It made sense AFTER explanation, but you shouldn't have to explain it. Two heads sharing one light bulb would look like they are sharing an idea. That would have been easier to understand. The entire body reminded me of restroom signs!

The first thing my eyes saw were the "Yesterday/today/tomorrow" images, and my first thought was seriously "What?" I don't entirely understand the purpose of those images, and they're drawing attention away from...more informative things, like the text beneath them.


So, I wasn't the only one who felt that way. I understood it after I read it, but many people would be confused or intimidated by graphs.

Use your freedom of speech. But be polite and try to limit yourself to constructive criticism.

Maybe this statement should be in bold type on the home page. ;)

[Doc C]

It sort of looked to me like a guy wearing a REALLY BIG cowboy hat. But then again, I see strange things in clouds too. Oh, look, a bunny with a pig's nose and a horse's tail.
See. I told you. :D

I like the site by the way.

[workfaction]

Kitchensink108:

Yes I agree with you on the yesterday,today & tomorrow bit. Well what I figured was that I have a few seconds to tell the user what the site is about, hence the visual cues followed up by text. But I was planning to redo the entire front page as just neat text outlining the benefits of the site. That’s why I still haven't changed the spelling to TOMORROW from TOMMOROW, as Doc C aptly suggested. I am busy with some server issues. so ill post an update as soon as I get everything up to speed, including css.

Neat Pete:

Hmmm... well you seem to be irritated by logos.' chimp on loan from San Diego zoo', lol...
I'm confused here. Do you think the logo is a bad idea or it does not matter ?
"if nobody can figure out what the logo means, you might as well have a photo, a sketch or artwork, or a piece of clip art." Well, the way I see it is: a logo is a symbol used to identify an entity. And yes I agree nike messed up with the swoosh but in my limited capacity I tried to keep the logo simple by using stick figures(generally used to represent users or the general public) and speech bubbles to show exchange of information. I have done this so that it is easily remembered. I tried to put 'work' and 'faction' into a logo. At first I thought to use a symbol for work (hand holding a hammer/spanner ? or a beehive ?)And it didn’t seem to work as this starts to look like a mechanics website. But if you come up with a good idea for the logo, I’d consider it :)

YvetteKuhns:

As stated above I'm going to revamp the page, I'll let you know when I do :)

Doc C:

Well thank you :)

[YvetteKuhns]

the way I see it is: a logo is a symbol used to identify an entity. But if you come up with a good idea for the logo, I’d consider it

Two heads sharing one light bulb would look like they are sharing an idea. That would have been easier to understand.

You could search Google images for ideas. I would simplify the image and use only a few colors as you have done in your original logo. See what you like or don't like and if you would have an idea what the image meant without text near it.

http://www.oadl.dip-caceres.org/GuiaLUCES/en/Images/Cap05Fig03.gif

http://www.biblepicturegallery.com/free/Pics/Global.gif

http://www.brainboxx.co.uk/A3_ASPECTS/images2/TALKpartners2.gif

http://www.imagineeringezine.com/graphics/bstorm.jpg

http://thesmallbusinessclub.co.uk/_borders/Efbweb.jpg

[Neat Pete]

I'm not happy with logos. I'm not very good at graphic design. It costs thousands of dollars in consulting company's fees for those corporate logos that work so well. They do vast amounts of research to discover what the company is on about (and it's stating the bleeding obvious much of the time); then they brainstorm ideas to try to capture the essence of the company and its products. Then they tests lots of logo designs on lots of people till they get something reasonable.

By comparison, the people on this forum don't get your logo, and you have to explain it to us. I'm not against logos, but a picture might be better for now. I only have one logo on 5 web sites.

All this discussion of logos stops you from moving on to usability issues. But usability gurus like Jakob Nielsen and others will not permit web designers and programmers to be on their testing teams. The web site owners have enough bright ideas of their own, without hearing more from programmers and coders. The people on this forum are not typical computer users.

Free advice is worth what you pay for it. I don't review sites for usability any more. The last one, done for a good friend, was a disaster - he did exactly the opposite of what I recommended. Graphic designers convinced him that the space between lines of text was more important than the actual lines themselves. Talk about the Emperor's new clothes. And tiny fonts that nobody can read were the order of the day. I should have charged $1500 minimum.