zaziel
Now. Then. Previous. Next. Random. Ernst. Fallen. Crush. Notes&Quotes. Profile. Rings.
I'tr�m breit vula�oz�o ye spalla ei�tlin nel�ffnes pieqi aummit su berwegr'ra'ao.

Rev

Monday, Jan. 12, 2004 -
Ap�sl�min ida corbalanyrtne 'ls�o rohl'daathi�m v� nen�a iroyss�rd.

Woo-hoo! Lost another one of my Diaryland cherries. I got reviewed. My reviewer was Emily. Please welcome her with your applause.

Emily describes herself thusly: I'm 19 years old and attend a University in Southern California. Traveling is one of my passions in life. I am always dreaming of distant lands. Ironically, Intercultural Studies and Psychology are my majors. Someday I would like to be living in Nepal and working with children who were rescued from prostitution. As for diaries and recommendations...I have a strong dislike for profanity and depressing lay outs. Other than that, I am not very picky.

Ah, damn. She's not thirteen years old. How can I truly experience the choate sublimity of a Diaryland review if I'm not reviewed by a girl less than half my age with a spangly diary decorated with neopets, kitties, hearts and the picture of a pop star younger than my Duran Duran t-shirts? But that's not Emily's fault, so she loses no points and I lose five for pouting.

Emily's response to my admittedly offhand request for a review was breathtakingly speedy. If I had given the matter more thought, I might have waited for a time when I was less absent from my diary, but then again, the only other time I've asked for a review I waited three months and nothing happened. Still, I don't think we're going to give Emily points for promptness. She was a little too prompt. She may have read more than six pages of my diary, she may have read the whole dang thing, but it's not evident in her review.

Emily is a no-nonsense gal who gets right down to brass tacks. (Ouch. Points subtracted from my total for clich� abuse.)

Contact: e-mail, guestbook, and notes (5/5)

But do I write back? I'm taking ten points off my score for not answering veg, who misses me. I miss me too, darlin'. And that was a really nice thing you said about the "Cherishing the Inner Bitch" entry, especially coming from someone whose writing I respect as much as I do yours.

Emily, did you read the "Cherishing the Inner Bitch" entry? Tsk tsk and minus ten points if you didn't.

Errors: There are way to many links to check them all! So the ones that I used, I only found one error. (4/5)

Boom! Emily loses a specificity point. How can I fix the link if she doesn't tell me which one it is?

Navigation: All on the top of the page. However, you have a lot of random links on the sides of your diary. It seems cluttered. It also took a long time to open every page because of all those links. (7/10)

Ah, the impatience of youth! Can't wait six seconds? But seriously, I didn't know this was a problem. Anyone else having this problem? Feedback is, as always, welcome. On any given day, the problem might be with your computer, with your ISP, or with Diaryland's servers. I thought my computer's operating system and internet speed were average at best, or even sub-standard, since my computer is over three years old and I'm running the infamously buggy Windows ME with Internet Explorer 5.5. For me, without DSL, without high-speed broadband, with just a pokey ol' dial-up connection, it takes between four and eight seconds for all text and text links to load on my pages. The pictures take a little longer, but there's always something to read for the 20-odd seconds it takes for every image to appear.

Updates: You jump around and miss a lot of days. You also have a 2004 entry placed in October 2003 area in your archive/link page. (9/15)

Points subtracted from Emily's score for understatement. I missed a lot of days? Jesus Christ, woman, I disappeared for more than six weeks! Don't just sit there and politely murmur "Gee whiz, 'Zaziel has missed a lot of days." Call 911!

Points lost because of inexactitude and lack of comprehension. The 2004 entry is nestled within September 2003, which is when the Revolving Joseph Cornell was launched. If Emily had studied the Revolving Joseph Cornell carefully, she should've realized I change the date every time the picture changes, but the page remains in the same place in the archive so people can link to it. Faithful readers can ding me with lost points for the spastic irregularity of the RJC, which is supposed to feature a new Cornell every day.

But Emily does get five points for avoiding the use of the loathsome "alot".

Yeah, yeah, I know, I get a buncha points subtracted for disappearing for six weeks, especially since it's not the first time I've done it. Points subtracted from Emily's score if she can't find the other time I scarpered. Points subtracted if she has to look up scarpered in the dictionary.

Layout Design: Okay. You need to work on this! You have a lovely green background with a cream color title.

Is it cream for you? Hmm. It's sage green for me. Five points for you, five points for me.

I really like that part of the layout!

Yes! It is kick-ass, isn't it? Fifty points for you.

However after that it becomes unorganized. I feel like I walked into a messy room with random things thrown everywhere! Have a separate page for you links than your archive page. I would also suggest writing a little about each link so the reader knows where it leads to and if they would like to open that page. You need to clean it up and organize it. (14/20)

Well, no, I don't. Organic geometry is the quality I want, not regimented order. You may not see it, because it's not meant to be perceptible, but each link is placed according to a carefully calculated ratio extrapolated from the Golden Mean in order to produce proportions as natural as tree branches. Messy and random? I'll take that as a confirmation that the design is progressing in the right direction. As for the links, most of them are self-evident, and those that aren't, aren't meant to be. It's an Easter egg hunt, as one of my favorite royal personages described it. I'm not going to put all the eggs in one basket, what fun would that be? And why should I write a redundant little homily about every single link when you can hover your cursor over it and read exactly where you're going in the lower-left corner of your browser frame? Am I wrong to credit people with that much intelligence?

'Fraid I've got to take some whoppin' big points away from Emily for not doing the math and not having the sense of a six-year-old on Easter morning.

Content: Your writing cracks me up! I can not believe that you sent a birthday card to a random stranger. Okay, besides that you write really well! Thank you for using grammar and punctuation! Your entries vary from entry to entry. Sometimes it is a bit confusing to read, but I understand the general gist. I think you need to add more emotion to your entries. You tell the story very well however you do not include much emotion. (29/35)

Ooh, skewered me! I often write ironically, and the voice of irony is cool and distant. If you're looking for your daily fix of schadenfreude this is not the place to come. And yes, I am anal about grammar, punctuation and spelling, but not to the point where I can't occasionally bend the rules, break 'em, and stomp 'em into dust. Points to me for sensible use of the English language. Points to Emily for appreciating my sensible use of the English language.

Would I come back? not likely (2/5)

Awwww. No, really? Oh, well, you're gonna miss out on all the hot boy-on-boy sex. Hey! How come ya didn't take away points for the paucity of hot boy-on-boy sex? It's been too damn long since I wrote about all the hot boy-on-boy sex that's been going on 'round here, don't ya think? I'm knocking twenty points off my score for that alone.

And big points off your score if you have to look up paucity in the dictionary.

Extras: Too many to count.(5/5)

Jeez-Louise, Em, count them, pleeeeez. There's less than a hundred.

Total Points: 75/100 Your writing is great! Add emotion to it and it will be amazing. All you need to do is work on your layout. Organize it! You can then apply for a re-review in no less than 30 days.

Okay, how'd we do? Out of a possible 695 points, Emily's got 480. Out of a possible 580 points, I scored 430. Looks like I win, 74% over 69%, but we probably should concede twenty points to Em because of my home field advantage. Which gives her a score of 72. Not too shabby, Emily! If you'd like to improve your score, read my diary for no less than 30 days, and join one of my rings to get mucho bonus points! The Linga ring pays out 200 points, 100 points for joining the Callipygian ring, and for Cheap Chic you'll get 50. If you join all three, you will have 830 points, which would put you at 119.4%, and that score would qualify you for the Grand Prize! Which means that you, Emily, could become a character or beast or building or small province in Tindermoss, my online novel-in-progress.

Wow, huh?

<~>
Ap�sl�min ida corbalan� 'lse nesgla ugar�-cham sa cru ogrulho bat�oltha al�mv�sde.

last eleven:

Resurrection - Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Arts and Letters -
Friday, June 17, 2005
Domestic Obsessions -
Tuesday, April 5, 2005
The Kindness of Strangers -
Tuesday, April 5, 2005
Gone -
Saturday, April 2, 2005
Coming Back, Little By Little -
Saturday, April 2, 2005
Effing Around -
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Explicably Yours -
Wednesday, February 9, 2005
Things Too Innumerable To Mention -
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Mr. Armstrong -
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
The Pope in Our Kitchen -
Saturday, October 2, 2004



<- Z @ D ->

Sa r'ji�o oss�vel meninonceiv �o poshik m�'�nch uscantebatahla o�r musiu o�r muiko.
Copyright � 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 by gcs

This site is best viewed at 1024 by 768 pixels, or 1152 by 864 pixels, with fonts
Times New Roman, Verdana, Book Antiqua and QuantasBroadLight. Click HERE
to add this diary to your list of favorites.































([