More Good Out Done?

[_Gadianton]

I checked out "postmormon.org" yesterday for the first time. The first thing that came to mind was that, in a competition between professional-looking websites, "postmormon.org" beats any of the "more good" .org sites hands down. Does anyone who knows the participants on that site know if the slide show are pictures of real members of the group? At first I thought no, but then some of them seemed like maybe they'd be real. I can guarantee the "more good" photos of black families set A back a hundred bucks a piece. In any case, the layout of postmormon.org and its webdesign is great, much better than the "more good" sites. Not to mention, it appears to be an actual organization with members.

[_KimberlyAnn]

No, Gad, from what I understand, the pics on PostMormon are not of it's members.

But, it is a real organization that puts up billboards and advertises in newspapers - all to let people struggling with Mormonism know they're not alone.

I had the good fortune of meeting several of the posters on that board at last week's exmo conference and found them fun, friendly and articulate. I enjoyed them all very much!

KA

[_Gadianton]

well, that would have been a plus, but again, it's more professionally canned then what "more good" comes up with. i think that's funny.

[_Blixa]

Except I can't abide the colour scheme. I know, I know I'm a "visualist," a design nazi, and an aesthetic terrorist.

I can't help it. God made me this way.

[_keene]

I just looked at postmormon.org for the first time, and wow! They do have a good design!

I'm not much a fan of the source code (far too much javascript and tables for my taste), but still, quite decent. I'll have to steal a few of their ideas.

[_mormonmistress]

Are you a web designer keene? If so, I would suggest you look at other sites!

I just took a look at postmormon. I think it's terrible, aesthetically and technically. It doesn't resize and the usability aspect is pretty shocking. Text blurring into more text with far too little space. Gives me a headache!

[_keene]

Are you a web designer keene?

Aye, I'm the webdesigner for this site here.

[_Trevor]

The point of the More Good Foundation's efforts is to flood the internet with sites that present positive things about Mormonism--not substantive, not thought-provoking, etc. The idea is to see websites unfavorable to the LDS Church buried in Google searches in a tide of MGF sludge. Therefore, it makes little difference whether the site contributes anything useful, looks good, or adds to our education about Mormonism. The philosophy behind it seems to be this: "if I don't like the flyers they are putting on cars in the parking lot, I will produce three for every one they make so as to really clutter things up."

They are purveyors of net litter, nothing more.

[_dartagnan]

According to its Q&A section:

2. Question: Were did the photos on the home page come from? Are they pictures of real post-Mormons?

Answer:The pictures on the home page are stock photography, obtained from a vendor of stock photography. At this time PostMormon.org doesn't have the resources to produce quality photos of real post-Mormons, and it's not easy finding post-Mormons who are willing to have their faces plastered on a website or billboard for former Mormons. We do however feel that the photos used are a reasonably good representation of the average post-Mormon individual, family, couple, etc. Over time, and one by one, we hope to substitute the stock photos with real post-Mormons.

[_Infymus]

Post Mormon is a bandwidth nightmare. I can't stand the format at all, and I don't give a damn about it all being pretty. Load a message, all the javascript crap... Jeeze.

Ah the good old days of FIDONET packets. Simplicity.