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?"

3 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.
  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. 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.