Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

If You Had To Vote Based On Candidates' Web Pages

Posted by timothy on from the you'd-never-vote-at-all dept.

Kookus writes "Which party has the best team of web deployers/developers? Neither main page passes w3c's html validator, but Kerry's has much fewer "errors". These pages do not seem to do well on Bobby either... Both seem to be using Akamai's HTTP Acceleration/Mirror service which appears to be running linux, Granted that it is hard to please everyone; which team is doing the best job?"

4 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Re:wow, that's dumb by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 4, Insightful

    True, it's pretty silly. (And pretty clearly a joke, given the icons posted with the story.) But is it worse than picking a candidate based on who is more attractive or taller? Given that people seem to use things like looks or who they're most like to have a beer with, I'm not sure the web page validity is necessarily a significantly dumber criterion. They all leave me weeping for my country.

  2. also by Naikrovek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    lets talk about how compliant slashdot is before we talk about other sites' compliance, please.

    you know, the whole "police yourself before you police others" thing that we hear so much these days.

  3. seriously by Glog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can you people come up with any dumber reasons who to vote for? Here is a selection of other things you might consider when voting:

    1. What did each candidate have for breakfast?
    2. Do they snore?
    3. Who does your dog bark at more?
    4. Do you get better tv reception when Bush is on or Kerry?
    5. Who would Leiutenant Worf vote for?

    Give me a break already!

  4. Re:Cheap shot... by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Insightful
    It's not a cheap shot. Bush' website is blocking visitors deemed to be outside of the US. So...

    If I were chosing a US president based on their web pages Bush wouldn't even be on the ballot.