Just a post to advise anyone interested that we have updated our
website to include all those pieces purchased during 2004 which we had
not managed to catalogue during the year!

This includes work by the following ..


Stuart Mortimer (Pagan - tends to polarize opinion!)
Mark Baker
Marcel van Berkel
Paul Reeves (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Luc de Roo (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Rosemary Wright
Bryan Scott
Phil Irons
Charles Sharpe (RPT award winning piece)
Jacques Vesery - replacement to the Tony Boase tribute piece that was
stolen (yes really!) from David Woodward's gallery in Hay on Wye.
Ian Clarkson
Ray Key (classic Ray form - lovely Masur birch figuring)

In an effort to accommodate dial-up as well as broadband viewers, the
picture resolution has been kept to an absolute minimum - anyone
wanting a better quality image (for genuine purposes) should send me an
email and I will see if I can assist.

Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

Happy New Year - look forward to seeing some of you during 2005.

Jonathon & Shirley

http://www.thedanielcollection.com
A private collectin of fine turned wood in the UK

Ok, I'll bite...

I think that the collection is very impressive. But, I don't like at all the non-intuitive
implementation of scrolling on the site. For me it is awkward to use, slow and hard to get
the list to stop scrolling where I want it. Maybe that is just me, though.

Bill

In article . com,
says...
Just a post to advise anyone interested that we have updated our
website to include all those pieces purchased during 2004 which we had
not managed to catalogue during the year!

This includes work by the following ..


Stuart Mortimer (Pagan - tends to polarize opinion!)
Mark Baker
Marcel van Berkel
Paul Reeves (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Luc de Roo (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Rosemary Wright
Bryan Scott
Phil Irons
Charles Sharpe (RPT award winning piece)
Jacques Vesery - replacement to the Tony Boase tribute piece that was
stolen (yes really!) from David Woodward's gallery in Hay on Wye.
Ian Clarkson
Ray Key (classic Ray form - lovely Masur birch figuring)

In an effort to accommodate dial-up as well as broadband viewers, the
picture resolution has been kept to an absolute minimum - anyone
wanting a better quality image (for genuine purposes) should send me an
email and I will see if I can assist.

Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

Happy New Year - look forward to seeing some of you during 2005.

Jonathon & Shirley

http://www.thedanielcollection.com
A private collectin of fine turned wood in the UK

Bill Rubenstein wrote:
I think that the collection is very impressive. But, I don't like at
all the non-intuitive implementation of scrolling on the site. For
me it is awkward to use, slow and hard to get the list to stop
scrolling where I want it. Maybe that is just me, though.

No it isn't just you, I find it irritating and annoying too. What's
wrong with plain old ordinary scroll bars that everybody knows how to use?

--
Alun

Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

Jonathon wrote:
Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

*PLONK*

Hmmmmm......

I thought that you were interested in constructive comments. Obviously you weren't -- you
were just saying that you were. Why is that?

Bill

In article . com,
says...
Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

"Jonathon" wrote in message
ups.com...
Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

Ah. Apparently constructive feedback is *not* welcomed. Congratulations on
telling scores of people who might have actually visited your site to bugger
off.

todd

Todd

Dont recall actually using the language "bugger off" but clearly this
sits more comfortably with you which tells me more than I need to know
- thanks for this clarification. Perhaps the answer is password access
- or country restrictions.
To all the "scores" of people you allude to - visit or dont, but dont
be swayed by others' opinions, make you own mind up.
To those of you who do visit - most of whom are known names in this
area of art - I say "Happy New Year" and hope that, knowing me, you
read this string with wry amusement.
Interesting how quickly something deteriorates into such an
unconstructive thread - one of the reasons I rarely bother posting to
groups. Perhaps the world of wood turning is so flush with collectors
that you feel comfortable in your language - after all what is one less
person who would otherwise seek your work out.

On 1 Jan 2005 05:59:11 -0800, "Jonathon"
wrote:

Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

Wow, my first plonk of the new year.

What kind of yahoo spams a usenet group, asks for opinions, then gets
annoyed upon receiving them? They weren't even rude or obnoxious, just
blunt.

I would have been interested, but am certainly not going to go to this
site and risk sending ad revenue to this twit.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.
"I always wanted to be somebody...I should have been more specific..." - Lily Tomlin

Jonathon wrote:
Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

A nice site. I think it would benefit visitors if there was a little
more information about yourselves, and each of the woodturners featured.

I agree somewhat with the comments about scrolling, the biggest problem
being the direction of the arrows seems wrong. It's a bit like driving a
car with a steering wheel that needs to be turned left to go right It
is nice though not to have an ugly scroll bar stuck in the middle of the
page.

What magazine was your collection featured in? Is it available on line
anywhere?


--
Derek Andrews, woodturner

http://www.seafoamwoodturning.com
Wedding Favors ~ Artisan Crafted Gifts ~ One-of-a-Kind Woodturning

Mike

"Yahoo", "plonk" - what planet are you on? Or are you just
Lilliputian?
Spamming? This would imply an offer to buy? Check facts first
perhaps?
Hmm ad-revenue. Wonder where that little gem came from! Ad-revenue
from a privately owned, run site - please tell me how to generate some
and perhaps I can stop running this at a loss.
UK collector, one of only 2-3 serious collections this side of the pond
- sharing collection with those interested and perhaps wasting my time.

We are well known by The Woodturning Centre and Albert LeCoff (you do
know where this is dont you), many US galleries, the AWGB (same
applies) and many other turners whose names WILL be known.
All in all a highly entertaining and instructive thread.

And twit - hmm books and covers Mr Patterson.
Another turner not to bother with when we visit the US.

Derek

Thanks for the post.
We deliberately omit information about ourselves for security reasons
mainly - and also to focus on the wood which is what the site is really
about. Experience has shown us, to date at least, that those who want
to meet us either visit (by prior appointment when, contrary to the
view you might pick up from this thread, they are made welcome and
usually given a meal) or when at a show, get someone they do know
(Stuart Mortimer, Mark Hancock, Mark Baker etc) to introduce them.
However quite happy to enter into private correspondence - just use the
email link from the site. Perhaps we can correspond without some of
the nonsense evident above.
You have correctly determined the reason a scroll bar was excluded from
the middle of the page as it would have been both disproportionate in
size and style - including an iFrame style. In passing, few realise
the complexity of the site, using as it does multi-layers, absolute
positioning etc etc.
To your last question - the collection was featured in Woodturining
(copies of the article appear in the site) and more recently in the
Financial Times' "How to Spend it" weekend mag however we have not yet
got permission to include the FT article on the site.

Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

Ok. At the risk of being flamed, or dis-invited, as other have already
been, here goes....

First off, thank you for your work in displaying the talents of these
amazing artists to the world. I appreciate your efforts and your support of
woodturning through your collecting, photography and obvious love of turned
wood.

The splash screen at the beginning is a nice change from the ubiquitous
Flash movie. It still isn't necessary or particularly useful, but at least
it is a nice image, tells the visitor what is inside and how to get there.
If you changed the image each time a visitor arrived (from your
secret-password approved list or non-restricted country), which is easily
done, it would be a lot more interesting.

I understand that you want absolute control over how your site displays, but
the level of control you are shooting for is not so easily accomplished,
especially with a complex site such as this. Recommending a browser and a
resolution setting is not a legitimate alternative to the hard work of
getting your fairly complex site to style correctly in all popular browsers.
Like it or not, many studies have shown that most people browse about 800
pixels wide, regardless of the size of their monitor, and will not resize
just because you want them to. The more common choice is to immediately go
somewhere else with their next mouse click. If you want everyone to get the
most out of your site (and comments like "Dont visit again - clearly it is
not suited to you." might point out that you do not), it is up to you to
make sure that it displays properly or degrades gracefully... and yours,
unfortunately, does not.

Your photographs are very nicely done. Disabling the right-click feature,
however, smacks of pettyness. You've already displayed the photos,
appropriately, at fairly small size and resolution, limiting the desire to
steal. Better (in my opinion) than not allowing others to share them would
be to have an inobtrusive copyright statement with the name of the
photographer tucked into a corner. Yes, I know that these can usually be
stripped out easily by a graphics processor, but most of the interested
would just keep the images or at worst simply repost them, letting the world
know forever more who took that amazing photo. I am also assuming that you
have the permission of the artists to photograph and display their work in
this restrictive fashion. I find it fascinating that the web sites of the
artists listed in your links page do not disable right-click saving of the
photos of their work - but you do.

Some of the gallery links (such as Laura Ponting) do not function correctly.
Since I have not checked all of them, you might want to check the links
throughout your site.

You need to spelll-chekc every single page of your site - and your emails
for that matter.

Using non-standard design elements, such as the scroll arrows on your site,
no matter how cool they are or how long long they took you to develop, are
just that: non-standard. Non-standard navigational elements, in particular,
confuse visitors and get them to leave faster than anything else. As has
been pointed out by others, your scroll arrows seem to work opposite what I
expected; this may be a cultural expectation and might be easy to remedy, if
you are interested. I understand that you wanted something nicer than the
standard scroll bars, and nicer ones do exist, as do page layouts that do
not invite separate scolling in each frame (another "feature" you are using
that is quickly, and appropriately, becoming rare) . Getting rid of the
frames may, in fact, lead you to better, more attractive page layouts that
are easier to maintain and style across your site. You have already
received, and chosen to riducule, feedback that your site navigation is not
working well. Fixing it is your choice.

An online reference that you may find useful:
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/
Don't be put off by the name, it is a very useful site if studied with an
open mind and a sincere desire to improve your web authoring skills. Pay
particular attention to the secions on Mystery Meat Navigation.

Have a Happy New Year, Jonathon
I hope your 2005 brings you amazing finds for your collection.

Michael Latcha - at home in Redford, MI

Jonathon wrote:
To your last question - the collection was featured in Woodturining
(copies of the article appear in the site)

Sorry, I missed it before. I didn't realise the thumnails were clickable
because the mouse pointer doesn't change shape when I mouse over. A
very interesting article.

One question that you might like to add to your FAQ: Why did you start
collecting woodturning?


--
Derek Andrews, woodturner

http://www.seafoamwoodturning.com
Wedding Favors ~ Artisan Crafted Gifts ~ One-of-a-Kind Woodturning

Jonathon wrote:
....snip To your last question - the collection was featured in Woodturining

Sorry, I missed it before. I didn't realise the thumnails were clickable
because the mouse pointer doesn't change shape when I mouse over.
....snip

It seems that the above might be interpreted as a criticism by our thin-skinned web designer
-- I hope that you are not one of those who is going to be banished from the site forever or
at least told to stay away.

Bill

Oh dear Bill.
Get back in your pram and someone will return dolly to you!

Thanks Michael - reply sent off-list

I think that the collection is very impressive. But, I don't like at
all the non-intuitive implementation of scrolling on the site. For
me it is awkward to use, slow and hard to get the list to stop
scrolling where I want it. Maybe that is just me, though.

No it isn't just you, I find it irritating and annoying too. What's
wrong with plain old ordinary scroll bars that everybody knows how to use?

Aspiring web designers like to feel like they're doing somethign "cool"
or innovative. Usability out the window, they just want it to look good.

steve

Well "somethign" is perhaps the way you would write for a site Mr Wolfe
but not my style. Not in any dictionary I can find. Or perhaps that
is how you would articulate usability?
Innovative and cool - hmm well perhaps if you are not familiar with
layers and scrolling then yes.
Then again perhaps you could educate me with examples of your "cool"
work - a URL or two by way of return posting? Something a little more
positive - and harder than cheap shots. Or would that be asking too
much?

And a Happy New Year To ALL. Great start for the year.

Jonathon wrote:

Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

It's a nice site. Once you get used to the scrolling, it not too bad.
One thing I don't like is that the scrolling doesn't "stick". For
example, if you scroll down to, say, Stuart Mortimer and then click to
look at his work, the list goes back to the top and then if you want to
go to the person below Stuart, you need to scroll again. It's a pain.
Like others, I'd prefer to see the whole list and if it goes off the
page, just use the scroll bars (or scroll wheel on the mouse) to see the
what's not on the screen.

Also...don't ask for constructive feedback and then get bent out of
shape when people give it. You're coming across as a pompous ass.

me



Jonathon wrote:
Just a post to advise anyone interested that we have updated our
website to include all those pieces purchased during 2004 which we had
not managed to catalogue during the year!

This includes work by the following ..


Stuart Mortimer (Pagan - tends to polarize opinion!)
Mark Baker
Marcel van Berkel
Paul Reeves (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Luc de Roo (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Rosemary Wright
Bryan Scott
Phil Irons
Charles Sharpe (RPT award winning piece)
Jacques Vesery - replacement to the Tony Boase tribute piece that was
stolen (yes really!) from David Woodward's gallery in Hay on Wye.
Ian Clarkson
Ray Key (classic Ray form - lovely Masur birch figuring)

In an effort to accommodate dial-up as well as broadband viewers, the
picture resolution has been kept to an absolute minimum - anyone
wanting a better quality image (for genuine purposes) should send me an
email and I will see if I can assist.

Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

Happy New Year - look forward to seeing some of you during 2005.

Jonathon & Shirley

http://www.thedanielcollection.com
A private collectin of fine turned wood in the UK

Your comment on not being able to go back to where you had scrolled
down to is fair - at the moment I do not know how to fix this issue but
am looking into it.
Bent out of shape - oh dear, I've barely started!
Hmm constructive feedback - I do not consider being termed
a) a yahoo (I presume the poster did actually understand the Lilliput
reference?!)
b) a spammer
c) someone trying to drive up ad revenue
d) a twit
either constructive or conducive to civil exchange.
If you want to interpret my responses to such ignorant posts pompous -
*shrugs* then that's fine with me.

They may not have said it in a PC way but what they said is true. It's
obvious that you intended to put together a professional classy site - and
you've succeeded no question. I'm sure you know that sites today are very
complex, putting together a site without any "bugs" is next to impossible.
But the scroll feature is a bit annoying. It took me a couple of minutes to
realize I have to drag my cursor over the top arrow to move the list down,
that to me wasn't a problem. What was a bit tedious was after looking at a
particular item the site returns you to a main menu but doesn't remember
where you were on that list. Being that your menu of turners quite long, I
as a viewer of you site have to keep scrolling down to where I last was.
Thankfully the names change color ever so slightly to indicate a viewed link
or I'd be lost. If I wasn't a turning fanatic I would probably leave soon
after I had viewed the names that can be easily listed on my screen.




"Jonathon" wrote in message
ups.com...
Bill & Alun

Thanks for the comments - as you both seem to find the site irritating
and annoying I have a radical solution which can be immediately
implemented - tailored to the individual too.

Dont visit again - clearly it is not suited to you.

There - a customised response to an expressed problem. Thanks for
taking the time and a Happy New Year to you.

Jonathon

Reply sent off-list

Thankfully this feature is easily gotten around even in IE. I admit I've
grabbed a couple of the pictures for my reference data base. At present
have over 4000 digital pictures of furniture and turnings spanning about 700
years of world history. I hope you only look at this as a compliment. You
have pictures there that are (to me) worthy of saving for use as inspiration
on future work.


"Michael Latcha" wrote in message
...
Your photographs are very nicely done. Disabling the right-click feature,
however, smacks of pettyness. You've already displayed the photos,
appropriately, at fairly small size and resolution, limiting the desire to
steal. Better (in my opinion) than not allowing others to share them
would
be to have an inobtrusive copyright statement with the name of the
photographer tucked into a corner. Yes, I know that these can usually be
stripped out easily by a graphics processor, but most of the interested
would just keep the images or at worst simply repost them, letting the
world
know forever more who took that amazing photo. I am also assuming that
you
have the permission of the artists to photograph and display their work in
this restrictive fashion. I find it fascinating that the web sites of the
artists listed in your links page do not disable right-click saving of the
photos of their work - but you do.

Well "somethign" is perhaps the way you would write for a site Mr Wolfe
but not my style. Not in any dictionary I can find. Or perhaps that
is how you would articulate usability?

Why don't you do yourself (and your career) a favor and purchase some
books on web site usability.

Now, if you really don't care if people visit or stay at your site, that's
fine, do whatever you want. However, if you want people to visit, stay at,
and go back to your site, then you have to keep their overall experience in
mind, and no matter how pretty the pages are (they are quite attractive), if
navigation is cumbersome, you *will* lose visitors. Again, if you don't
want visitors, that's all fine - but the facts that you took the time to
create the page and that you invited people to visit seem to indicate that
you *would* like some. I could be wrong.

As another tip, don't ask people for feedback if you can't take it. Bill
offered a pretty straight-forward, objective, non-offensive comment, and you
jumped down his throat and told him not to go back. That's not only
amateur, that's just juvenile.

steve

Since our web designer has been picking apart responses including typos and things the rest
of us ignore because we make these sorts of mistakes ourselves...

In your file http://www.thedanielcollection.co.uk/Gallerymain.htm you will find...

line 98: to be fully compliant with HTML 4.01 your 'style' element must have a type
attribute -- style type="text/css"

line 158: you have typed 'valign-' when you really meant to type 'valign='. This error is
found in your home page also -- on line 141.

line 232: HTML 4.01 and XHTML require the "type" attribute to specify the scripting language
for the "script" element. For example, use type="text/javascript" for JavaScript.

Actually, though, the html on this page is remarkably error free except for the above.

Bill

In article DuEBd.672391$%k.373433@pd7tw2no, says...
Thankfully this feature is easily gotten around even in IE. I admit I've
grabbed a couple of the pictures for my reference data base. At present
have over 4000 digital pictures of furniture and turnings spanning about 700
years of world history. I hope you only look at this as a compliment. You
have pictures there that are (to me) worthy of saving for use as inspiration
on future work.


"Michael Latcha" wrote in message
...
Your photographs are very nicely done. Disabling the right-click feature,
however, smacks of pettyness. You've already displayed the photos,
appropriately, at fairly small size and resolution, limiting the desire to
steal. Better (in my opinion) than not allowing others to share them
would
be to have an inobtrusive copyright statement with the name of the
photographer tucked into a corner. Yes, I know that these can usually be
stripped out easily by a graphics processor, but most of the interested
would just keep the images or at worst simply repost them, letting the
world
know forever more who took that amazing photo. I am also assuming that
you
have the permission of the artists to photograph and display their work in
this restrictive fashion. I find it fascinating that the web sites of the
artists listed in your links page do not disable right-click saving of the
photos of their work - but you do.

Bill

Balanced - and I thank you for note only the tone but the effort gone
into making this post. I will review and amend.


Jonathon

I repeat the invite - which you have seem to have chosen to ignore.
Prove yourself to be anything other than an armchair critic and show
you can do more than just quote a few phrases (there are quite a few
books here in my library btw including one from which the layer coding
is derived - and that by a Dreamweaver alpha tester - go figure -
Dreamweaver 4 magic, New Ryders,Al Sparber - ISBN no available by
request!)
You presume to assume about my career?! On the basis that you have
decided that this is what I do for a living - this is the platform for
your criticisms? I was not aware that posters were psychic - and bad
ones at that. Arrogant presumption. When you assume (you'll love
this) you only make an ass . well guess the rest.
Mr Wolfe - this website is a service. Not a revenue stream as another
poster *assumed*, not a spam effort (same poster) and I am not a
"twit" (same twit poster).. If you or others don't like the syle or the
scrolling, the photography or whatever element - then please feel free
to ignore future update advices - if in the light of this screed I can
be bothered to make them. However, feedback from "interested"
woodturners who are keen to view a collection on the web (and there are
few enough of those) tells me that they soldier on through all these
patent inadequacies. The choice is yours - and as I dont track repeat
visits I have no opinion on them.

The suggestion of plastering some form of copyright symbol all over
them is gaining weight or perhaps leaving the images as thumbs and only
providing larger versions upon request.
I view the fact that you have seen fit to take the images despite this
entry level precaution this as a mixed compliment - and would have
expected to have been asked. There is a copyright notice on the site
????

On 1 Jan 2005 12:32:43 -0800, "Jonathon"
wrote:

Your comment on not being able to go back to where you had scrolled
down to is fair - at the moment I do not know how to fix this issue but
am looking into it.
Bent out of shape - oh dear, I've barely started!
Hmm constructive feedback - I do not consider being termed
a) a yahoo (I presume the poster did actually understand the Lilliput
reference?!)
b) a spammer
c) someone trying to drive up ad revenue
d) a twit
either constructive or conducive to civil exchange.
If you want to interpret my responses to such ignorant posts pompous -
*shrugs* then that's fine with me.
..

It would appear that you are using my post to condemn the group as a
whole and avoid the criticism you invited. If you want to bitch at me,
feel free, but don't use me as a brush with which to paint the rest of
the group.

My post was a response to your obvious irritation at actually
receiving the constructive criticism of others, which you had
requested.

a. I read Gulliver's Travels about 20 years ago, but do not remember
the reference you make. If I cared, I suppose I could find it in my
collection and refresh my memory. I don't care enough to spend the
time.

b, c, d. Usenet groups are frequently subjected to "false flag" posts
which are intended to lure people into visiting a web site for no
other reason than to increase the hit count on the site and thus
generate advertising revenue. Your original post and your response to
the (invited!) criticism of it bear a striking resemblance to previous
such spams and spammers.

It's true that I did not offer any constructive criticism, as I'd
already seen how you responded to it, so didn't bother.

As far as "civil exchange" goes, so far I believe I'm the only one who
has approached being less than civil. If it was unwarranted, then I
apologise.

On the other hand, a word of advice, if you intend to frequent Usenet
groups, you need to grow a thicker skin or face endless frustration
and irritation.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.
"I always wanted to be somebody...I should have been more specific..." - Lily Tomlin

Mr Patterson
I have no particular width of brush in mind but the tenor of your post
is not incosistent with others in this thread - therefore my responses
I believe to be suitably measured in tone and content.
Several people have received more considered posts off-list and
responses to posed questions. In fact I am extremely familiar with
USENET and this group in particular having been a contributor since at
least 2002.
Your apology is noted - gratefully - and I consider the matter closed.
The comment is likewise returned to you.
As to endless frustration / irritation - watch this space.

Jonathon

Are you associated with this filth Jonathon?

http://www.glamour-photo.co.uk/tfplist.html

I'm very dissapointed in you. I expected more from a gentleman such as
yourself. Bill is right. He said you were a depraved,effiminate limey
with bad teeth. I should have listened. I should never have posed for
those boudoir photos. I feel so dirty. If you ever dare to step foot on
US soil again Bill and I will teach you a lesson in manners and
morality you ******.

God Bless,
Al Kyder

"Jonathon" wrote in message
ups.com...
Todd

Dont recall actually using the language "bugger off" but clearly this
sits more comfortably with you which tells me more than I need to know
- thanks for this clarification.

I'm just pointing out that you come across as a major ass. You're welcome
for the clarification on that point.

Perhaps the answer is password access
- or country restrictions.

Wouldn't bother me at all if you limited it to people on your immediate LAN.

To all the "scores" of people you allude to - visit or dont, but dont
be swayed by others' opinions, make you own mind up.

I had visited it. I got about two artists into it before I got tired of the
navigation of the site and left. I didn't mention it because you didn't
particularly seem to care about anyone's actual experience.

To those of you who do visit - most of whom are known names in this
area of art - I say "Happy New Year" and hope that, knowing me, you
read this string with wry amusement.
Interesting how quickly something deteriorates into such an
unconstructive thread - one of the reasons I rarely bother posting to
groups. Perhaps the world of wood turning is so flush with collectors
that you feel comfortable in your language - after all what is one less
person who would otherwise seek your work out.

You're pretty funny. You blast the very first person with constructive
criticism, then wonder about how quickly the thread turns unconstructive.
You have yourself to thank for that.

The site didn't work too well for me either..........until I finally figured
it out. You roll the mouse pointer over the up or down arrows to start
scrolling. Roll the mouse pointer off the arrows to stop scrolling. I
found it to be...........cumbersome.

Barry

PS One who solicits constructive criticism.........shouldn't be offended
when it arrives.


"Bill Rubenstein" wrote in message
. net...
Ok, I'll bite...

I think that the collection is very impressive. But, I don't like at all
the non-intuitive
implementation of scrolling on the site. For me it is awkward to use,
slow and hard to get
the list to stop scrolling where I want it. Maybe that is just me,
though.

Bill

In article . com,

says...
Just a post to advise anyone interested that we have updated our
website to include all those pieces purchased during 2004 which we had
not managed to catalogue during the year!

This includes work by the following ..


Stuart Mortimer (Pagan - tends to polarize opinion!)
Mark Baker
Marcel van Berkel
Paul Reeves (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Luc de Roo (Exeter 1st prize winner)
Rosemary Wright
Bryan Scott
Phil Irons
Charles Sharpe (RPT award winning piece)
Jacques Vesery - replacement to the Tony Boase tribute piece that was
stolen (yes really!) from David Woodward's gallery in Hay on Wye.
Ian Clarkson
Ray Key (classic Ray form - lovely Masur birch figuring)

In an effort to accommodate dial-up as well as broadband viewers, the
picture resolution has been kept to an absolute minimum - anyone
wanting a better quality image (for genuine purposes) should send me an
email and I will see if I can assist.

Feedback - so long as it is constructive - welcomed. Any suggestions
as to site enhancement also welcomed. However be warned - flaming will
be posted!

Happy New Year - look forward to seeing some of you during 2005.

Jonathon & Shirley

http://www.thedanielcollection.com
A private collectin of fine turned wood in the UK

Hi Jonathan

I checked out your site. I am sure you put a lot of work into it, probably
a lot more work than I have put into my sites. I am a turner, not a
computer person. I built my own sites with the attitude that people are
there to see my turning, not how much I know about HTML coding. It has been
my experience that people like simple, not complex - well, most people
anyway. One of the most common feedback comments I get regarding my sites
is that they are relatively easy to navigate.

I do not know whether or not you will consider this constructive or not, but
here goes anyway. Make it simple and keep it simple. Not only will that
enable people to enjoy it, it will save you time and frustration trying to
make it go. I too found it very frustrating to figure out how to work the
scroll bars. I also did not care for the feature that caused a picture to
close when I clicked anywhere on my screen, even off the window in which the
picture was being displayed. I am not sure what the goal is there, but
again it was very frustrating to me. After trying to get through a couple
of the people listed on your site, I just gave up and went about my
business. I do not have time to try to decipher a website. That is too bad
really, since I would like to see some of the work you own and are
displaying. Maybe I'm just a big dummy, but who cares? I don't. I am sure
you don't.

You should not ask questions to which you do not want to hear the answers.
You seem to take delight in jumping all over people who did nothing more
than answer your post. I think you need to lighten up some. You posted
here inviting turners to come and see your efforts, and to offer comments as
well. It looks to me like you came here with a chip on your shoulder,
looking for a fight. If it weren't for the extensive work you have
obviously done on your site, I would put you down as a troll and ignore you
completely. You have invited the things others are writing with your
initial ripostes, and I cannot imagine that you are surprised it is
snowballing.

Now, I realize that in the light of these comments, I may be excoriated by
your rapier like wit. You might tell me not to come back to your site. You
might even (gasp!) plonk me! I will not be lying awake tonight worrying
about these horrendous possibilities. And, if you think I am going to worry
about your not buying my work in the future, guess again. I'm not some
starving artist kissing up to pretentious collectors in an attempt to make a
living. I make simple stuff for regular people to buy, and if they buy it,
great. If they don't, there is always someone else.

Oh yeah, I know Albert LeCoff personally too, although I will confess I have
not seen him in years. I even worked for him for a while at his invitation.
I know David Ellsworth personally - I live just down the road from him. So
what? That doesn't make me a better person. It just means we know each
other. In fact, I know a bunch of turners who are famous, some not so
famous, and some completely unkown. The vast majority of them are nice
friendly people. I don't know what your problem is. It seems like you have
a lot to offer, but it just might not be as important to the rest of us as
you seem to think.

--
Bill

Bill Grumbine

commercial site www.wonderfulwood.com
personal site www.enter.net/~ultradad
"Jonathon" wrote in message
ups.com...
Just a post to advise anyone interested that we have updated our
website to include all those pieces purchased during 2004 which we had
not managed to catalogue during the year!

I repeat the invite - which you have seem to have chosen to ignore.

I don't care to get into "double-dog-dare" contests with you. Sorry.
You asked for the feedback, you got it, end of story. If you can't take it,
go cry to someone who cares.

Prove yourself to be anything other than an armchair critic and show
you can do more than just quote a few phrases (there are quite a few
books here in my library btw including one from which the layer coding
is derived - and that by a Dreamweaver alpha tester - go figure -
Dreamweaver 4 magic, New Ryders,Al Sparber - ISBN no available by
request!)

You don't seem to have have mentioned any books on usability. Maybe I
missed something, but the last time I looked, reading a book on layers or
Dreamweaver didn't comprise anything like a text on usability. There is an
entire industry around usability, be it web sites, coffee pots, or lawn
mowers, and so searching Amazon for the term "usability" will get you a
pretty good list.

You presume to assume about my career?! On the basis that you have
decided that this is what I do for a living - this is the platform for
your criticisms?

(snip)

However, feedback from "interested"
woodturners who are keen to view a collection on the web (and there are
few enough of those) tells me that they soldier on through all these
patent inadequacies.

I guess I must have been wrong, it must not be your career if that's your
attitude - or you'd be collecting unemployment. Anyone with even a passing
familiarity with real-world web sites has found that just because a portion
of very-interested persons keeps going to your site, it doesn't mean that a
lot of other people turn away. I could go into the six years of data that
I've got from over 50 *very* active web sites (thousands of hits per minute,
how many do you get a week?), and into how many hundreds of thousands of
dollars we have poured not only into analysis of the data, but into active
testing and research on how usability and other factors influence site
visits - but I really don't think you'd care. And even if I was inclined,
it still wouldn't matter: There's a vast wealth of resources on the subject
out there for you if you're interested. You can take them or leave them as
you please.

In the end, because I haven't taken your petty, school-yard challenge to
have something along the lines of a web-site duel, I imagine that your
injured ego will prevent you from even considering anything I've said -
let's even say that you "won" because I declined the challenge. That's fine
with me, I have no interest in hearing any more of your blather, and have
now kill-filed you. If I offended you, I apologize - but I still invite you
to expand your horizons for your own benefit.

steve

Ah the measured reply of the self-righteous.
This from a country where "guns dont kill people - people do".
As for your pics Al, even Holland sent them back - rare for nobody to
want them but then again there are all sorts of surprises.
I had wondered when the usual dross poster(s) would surface.
And as for teaching me a lesson - you're nowhere near big enough.
****** - hmm perhaps the true colours are now showing. Did you manage
to type using both hands?

Yawn - usability is embedded in most of the tomes.
Petty school yard challenge - oh dear.
Apology accepted as I need to look at other responses and move on.
Again, clearly my sites "offends thee" - so dont go and look elsewhere
for your turning inspiration.
Oh and how about some of your work - where would I look to see this?

"Jonathon" wrote:

Ah the measured reply of the self-righteous.
This from a country where "guns dont kill people - people do".
As for your pics Al, even Holland sent them back - rare for nobody to
want them but then again there are all sorts of surprises.
I had wondered when the usual dross poster(s) would surface.
And as for teaching me a lesson - you're nowhere near big enough.
****** - hmm perhaps the true colours are now showing. Did you manage
to type using both hands?


By George, he really is a troll!!

Al K, is it you?