Who are we?

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:44 pm

Hi -- are we:

1. Constant Content
2. ConstantContent or
3. Constant-Content?

Thanks!

Ed · Post by Ed » Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:56 pm

Constant Content.

Post by **constant-content** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:13 pm

All of them

Looking at the site I can see how one would be confused. But really they all fit....

Celeste Stewart · Post by **Celeste Stewart** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:24 pm

I tend to use Constant-Content when writing about the site so that people can figure out Constant-Content.com as the web address.

Ed · Post by Ed » Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:47 am

I did ask Constant several months ago what he preferred. He said "Constant Content." So that's what I use in any professional correspondance. I have tried to point out inconsistencies on the site itself, but other priorities have gotten in the way.

Ed

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:10 am

Uhhhhhh, OK. So Constant Content isn't necessarily Consistent Constant Content. I think I'll stick with what you do.

If you were to ask me to list my priorities, I would have to say that changing "recomand" to "recommend" would edge this one out though.

Thanks, Ed.

Ed · Post by Ed » Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:23 am

I have no ability to change errors or inconsistencies onsite. I don't like them either.

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:14 pm

How unfortunate. There you are holding writers' feet to the fire so they meet Constant's high standards -- which, IMHO, sets this site apart -- and the web pages that shoppers see first have annoying little gnat-like mistakes.

IF I were a complainer, and everyone knows I'm not, but IF I were, I might point out that that isn't fair to the writers. Their bar is high, but the site's designers' apparently isn't (even if this complainer might think it's excellent and attractive in every other way). IF I were shopping for articles, this would be a warning flag. I'm NOT a shopper, but if I were...

I'm just sayin'...

Post by **constant-content** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:13 pm

hey hey... stop beating up the developers... Point out mistakes and they will get fixed.

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:30 pm

Cool! Thanks.

Pls note misspelling of "recommend" on new author profile page (which is very nice, by the way).

You're great.

Annetta Holmes · Post by **Annetta Holmes** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:41 am

Well done Grouchy, I was trying to figure out what that word could be. My brain cells weren't as quick as yours.

JD · Post by JD » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:55 am

You're too kind, Annetta. The rest of us couldn't figure out what the word was because it's so far removed from what it should be!

But we'd much rather have developers who know lots about IT and not much about spelling than the other way round, of course.

And the author profile is looking good - thanks!

JD

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:45 am

Annetta - my brain cells are faster because there are fewer of them.

Annetta Holmes · Post by **Annetta Holmes** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:27 am

Well I for one am very pleased that we have alert Authors [i]and [/i]bright boys and girls in IT.

The new profiles are definitely a hit!