03/09/2003
This is a review of sweet-cynic.diaryland.com.
Content - 54/65pts.
[-]Execution - 25/35pts. I was bored with your initial entries. Yawn. I began to skim. I wanted raw human emotion or clever jokes, but you doled out vague, meaningless (to me) introspection. I decided that this might be due to your rustiness at online journaling. Fine. So I skipped ahead.
And, look! Raw human emotion! Okay, so I had to keep reading. See if you broke up with what's-his-name with the dorky nickname.
Unfortunately, the next entry was seven words long, and you went to bed. Oh, no. Yawn. And, it did not bode well because you relapsed into vague nothings. I proceeded to skip ahead again. I thought, heh, heh, I'm gonna slash this girl's score so much...
Bummer to me. You whipped out raw human emotion again. Oh, bollocks to finding a middle ground. You're either oozing with emotion or being as boring as my grandmother's ottoman.
I proceeded to only read entries that had interesting titles.
Uh oh for me. In this entry you criticized diary review sites, saying that it's ridiculous to criticize content, since it's a person's personal thoughts. You asked, "What is this? An advocate for conformity? For censorship?" Eep.
To this, I must respond: first of all, shut up, girl.
Secondly, it is rather silly, isn't it? But I don't mind too much that what I do is silly since you did ask for the review. Sucks to you.
Thirdly, your journal is public. It's not written solely for you. If it were, it would be private. Get it? We all want attention. (Go visit my diary! Tell me what you think!) (That was JOKE, by the way.) (But you should still go to my diary.) (And also my site.)
Anyway, your diary is good in some places and juicily newsy in others and rather dull in others. It's a fun read if you pick out the entries that didn't have titles like "gah.. tests!" and "I have to study but I'm writing here instead." Your best entries seemed to be in the middle, but maybe that's just because March's been stressful to you. As a whiny Internet reader, I demand that you write less often and update only when you have raw human emotion to share with us.
[-]Grammar/Mechanics - 9/10pts. I saw one or two typos. I don't remember where though.
[-]Readability - 10/10pts. You write well. G'job.
[-]Style - 10/10pts. See above.
Layout - 20/20pts.
[-]Aesthetics - 10/10pts. I really only have a lot to say if I have anything to complain about. It was clean and elegant or some other stupid buzz words. Who really cares about layouts anyway? Stupid superficial jerks.
[-]Navigability - 5/5pts. Dum, dum.
[-]Legibility - 5/5pts. Did you say that you LIKED Bill Clinton?
Contact - 5/5pts. I live in Houston too. Why does everyone go to UT?
Updates - 5/5pts. Austin is a lovely city though. But UT? Everyone goes to UT.
Errors - 4/5pts. In the "Latest Entries" bit at the bottom of each page, March 7th's entry is listed twice. This is probably one of Diaryland's problems though.
Total - 88/100pts. Good job, kiddo. Now, if you hate the way these reviews work, why'd you decide to get one? At least you didn't get reviews done by about three hundred other review sites like everyone else I've reviewed has. It made me feel unhappy, and I wanted to refuse to review them, but if I did that, no one would ever ask me to review her (and they're ALL female). I have so much raw human emotion to share, and no one wants to hear it because everyone only wants to hear about herself. Selfish brutes.
Previous - Next - Back to Top
|
|