bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)bluclass3.gif (3494 bytes)
OntarioGenWeb Site Evaluations


bluclass4.gif (5157 bytes)



July 18.99

First I wish to thank all the evaluators for their efforts in this evaluation process.
I think it was a lopsided set of circumstances that were used as a basis for this evaluation,
but within those circumstances, you are all to be sincerely thanked for that effort,
even though the secrecy turned it into somewhat of a farce from where I stand.

This page after I accessed with the password was saved to my harddrive as is.
No changes were made to the original html or images, thus the reason for some of the images not loading.

The only additions I have made on this evaluation page concern the comments made by the evaluators.
My views/observations are stated in this color
and are listed below those the evaluator made.
Scroll down to read them.

I am doing this because I think you, the viewer has a right to know what is happening and
to help you understand the why of the decision I have now made if you are reading this.

Alex W. Fraser


County/District: Glengarry, Prescott & Stormont

Host: A.W. Fraser

Last Updated: 21 Feb 1999
Average Rating:
8.0  (1 being unacceptable / 10 being exceptional)

This rating is acceptable.

Requirements
These items must appear on this host site, do they?
OntarioGenWeb Logo Yes
Link to OntarioGenWeb Yes
CanadaGenWeb Logo Yes
Link to CanadaGenWeb Yes
Host Name Visible Yes
Host E-Mail Yes
Query Page Yes
No-No's
These items must not appear on this host site, do they?
Religious/Political Statements No
Non-Required Advertising Banners* Yes
Products for Sale** No

*Advertising banners are only acceptable if required by your web server
(ie, GeoCities, Tripod, etc)
**Products for sale are only acceptable if they are accompanied by a disclaimer (OGW does not profit, etc, etc)
You have 30 days to make any of the above corrections!


bluclass4.gif (5157 bytes)

Extras
Does this site offer anything above the required information, such as the following suggestions?
Maps Yes
Area history No
Info about local Gen Resources Yes
Snail Mail and E-mail Addresses to resources Yes
Links to resources Yes
Link to Census Project Yes
Link to Volunteer Pages No
Evaluator's Comments:

What did you LIKE about this site?
  the best thing about this site is the wealth and variety of information available
This statement about "the wealth and variety of information" contradicts the above statement that the site has "no Area History".
This begs the question ! How can a site with 15 megs of information dealing with local Genealogy and Local history NOT have included absolutely no local history in way shape or form??

A specific definition of exactly what "Local History" is , is now required.

What did you DISLIKE about this site?
  geocities popups, site is very cluttered
Geocities popups, should not have anything to do with the evaluation of this site as that is part of the conditions of accepting the page in the first place, thus becomes a put down in order to degrade the effort being made by the host. In regards to "site is very cluttered", certain thinks are a necessity, OGW logo, County maps, Sources for Research etc, and have to be put someplace, rather than present a blank page. From my point of view this page is not cluttered. To each his/her own opinion.

What can be done to IMPROVE this site?
  Since there are 4 counties being represented on this site, it is very confusing. I think it would be better to some how separate them. It seems some information is on one site and some is on another? Add link to OGW volunteer pages. Needs more local history information.

Viewers have not indicated that the site is confusing, if anything the opposite is the case. This site was set up as a 2 part site to prevent unnecessary duplication. The information listed came from our own [Alex W. Fraser/Rhoda Ross] collected files, NOT from an outside secondary source, but in most cases an original source. Much of the local information is common across the counties concerned in various forms, like Cemeteries, Churches, Local Groups, etc. Thus 1 main page [Cemeteries] leads to the breakdown of a number of local cemetery links, rather than 4 separate web page sites creating unwanted duplication.

The site was set up to be user friendly and I think that has been accomplished.

If this was made up in 4 or 5 sites rather than 2, there would be many, at least triple duplications of effort, information, taking up much extra time, extra harddrive and server space. Not a situation which many would be willing to accept based on the amount of time required to maintain 4 separate sites. Such duplication would be a turn off for viewers which they do not need.

Why is it mandatory [strongly suggested as mandatory] to link to the OGW Volunteer page [this past 2 weeks I have found at least 9 pages/links on that site that did not work, 6 on July 18.99. This is why I did not make a link to the OGW Volunteer page ( Aug.23.99 update, the above 6 pages were reported to Sherri & Kimberly, as not working on July 18th, 1999, 3 of which are still not working, namely -- NewVolunteer page, logos, Signup News - as of Aug.23.99) ] but not mandatory for county Hosts to link to the next door county, if the aim is indeed to help viewers find area information?

Prioities seem to be heading backwards with unnecessary roadblocks.

To me this whole set up seems unnecessary and very little short of being a farce.

Helping others for whatever the need is risky. We are all volunteers, not part of an Army Regiment. Turning these volunteer efforts to help into a contest of who can outsmart who, and a comparison of styles and ability will do more to negate the helping than the reverse.

There also seems to be a case of taking on to many tasks while abandoning/neglecting the need to look after what is already trying to be done. Maintaining a web site is time consuming, especially when things do not go right, like solving the reason for a blank page that shouldn't exist.

There is always a lot that needs to be done, no matter the passion of the person doing the job, but we are all limited by the 24 hour day we live in, in getting things done.

To much effort in my opinion is being used by the --powers that be-- to turn an interesting venture into a cold and robotic makeup, with little or no leeway for flexibity, humor or different views of approach.

The --powers that be-- both on and off the Internet these past about 30 years have never really welcomed my method of helping people, but that method has succeeded beyond what most are willing to admit to themselves, let alone in public. That help imperfect as it is viewed, is what in the end counts and over the time period concerned has touched 1000's and 1000's and 1000's of individuals.

I will also raise a last point, which also deals with an evaluation, but not this one. That is --Vote for your favorite Site--. To me the way this is set up and announced comes a cross more as a put on, a fix than an accurate record from the viewers. An excellent site and a favorite site should not be considered as equal or the same thing. Two separate categories should be used in this voting. Excellent site & Favourite site. The highest votes [number] for the top five sites [name of site] should be listed in all announcements. I think there should also be a minimum number of votes required for a site to qualify [say 25 or 50] so as to prevent the suspicion of a put on job to get votes.

The Truth Will Set You Free
Alex W. Fraser
July 18.99

 

Next Page
This evaluation was created by K. St-Louis for OGW using MS Access 97 and FrontPage 98
Graphics by: D-Mentia