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?"

9 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Cheap shot... by orkysoft · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, one of them tells me I'm not authorized to access it...

    --

    I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    1. 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.

  2. wow, that's dumb by guyo26 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    stupidest idea ever. Granted, it's news for nerds, but if you're so undecided still that you pick based on which website looks better, then please surrender your franchise immediately

  3. If this had been in the last election by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...then it'd have had to be Al Gore.

    Not because his website is particularly great, but because, if you View Source, you get...

    Thanks for checking out our source code! I plan to use this space to post
    special messages to those who are helping to improve our web site -- by making
    our site the best it can be. The fact that you are peeking behind the
    scenes at our site means you can make an important difference to this Internet
    effort. I'm grateful for your help and support in this campaign. Now let's
    keep working to build the 21st Century of our dreams!

    Al Gore
    Because, as we all know, Al used to hand write his HTML... ;-)
    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. Vint Cerf says he did. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative


    I can't find the email message now because I'm supposed to be working, but Vint Cerf told me that, before Al Gore, the ARPANET was a private utility. Al Gore decided it should be a public service, and provided considerable support from the U.S. Congress to turn the ARPANET into the Internet.

    Many people did the work. Many people should have some of the credit. But, according to Vint Cerf, Al Gore was the first public official to decide that there should be a public utility called the Internet.

    It shocks me how little people know about the activities of their government. It shocks me that, after all this time, people are still believing the disinformation written by Republican marketing writers.

    Don't believe the sound bites, read books. No one who read the more than 35 books about the Bush administration would vote for George W. Bush, that is clear.

    Even those who read magazines would know more than most U.S. citizens. For example:

    100 Facts and 1 Opinion -- The Non-Arguable Case Against the Bush Administration.

  7. 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!

  8. The results when I ran these through the validator by Morrisguy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bush(www.georgewbush.com): 303 errors.

    Kerry(www.johnkerry.com): 2 errors.

    Nader(www.votenader.org): unable to validate.

    Badnarik(badnarik.org): 13 errors.

    Cobb(www.votecobb.org): 217 errors.