[Webmaster_forum] This date thing is now way out of control

Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:48:06 -0500

--=====================_5571851==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

This date thing is now way out of control.  Do you know of any other 
USPS position where you can be publicly humiliated because you don't 
respond on a 24/7 basis.  How many of you have waited days, weeks, 
even months to get a response from elected USPS officers?  Do they 
get chastised? No, they get promoted.

As a webmaster, and in accordance with the new rules, you could be 
singled out by an appointed few for a "reduction in points" if your 
site contains A SINGLE DATE THAT IS ONE DAY OLD.

Were you told when you took the job of webmaster that you could bring 
embarrassment to your squadron if you took a vacation during the 
evaluation period and failed to keep a 24/7 website vigil?

Common sense has proven NOT to be applied during the evaluations.  I 
maintain 8 of the Districts Squadron websites. They are exact clones 
of each other. There was a 43 point spread between evaluations of 
those sites.  2 were not graded because they linked to a page
with an automated  "Last updated" date which was not under their 
control to change but was beyond the 90 day time limit.

And the "decision of the judges is final", no matter how flawed.

***************************************************
New Guide Lines:
The no tolerance situation concerns the websites qualification to be 
considered in the current Webawards program.  The evaluation sheet 
indicates that if the website is over 30 days out of date that it 
will not be evaluated.  Less than 30 days will result in a reduction 
of the points awarded.

From: WMMILLER@aol.com
To: usps-webmasters@usps.org, webmaster_forum@usps.org
Subject: [USPS-Webmasters] Website Requirement #11

Many websites have an entire year long calendar of events 
displayed.  That is certainly allowed in this rule, as long as there 
is some indication of what events have already transpired.  Many 
websites have come up with innovative means to make such a distinction.

********************************

Since there is no directive that this indication must be on a line 
item basis,  placing an automated date at the top of the page and a 
reminder that anything earlier than that is a "past event"  should 
fulfill the some indication requirements.  Also: Using calendars from 
publications excludes the calendar from time limit disqualification. 
Example:  http://dwsmark.com/Clients/CalEx.htm

I agree that some regulation on material needs to be imposed, but 
these new requirements have gone full scale the other way. They do 
not take into considerations Squadrons and Districts who require 
ExComm approval for ALL website changes.  Not all changes will be 
made the night of the event. During the summer there could be a 60 
day lag between meetings. I feel that the 90 day rule would best suit 
the "proof of abandonment" which this rule was meant to 
catch.  Anything else can only be considered a tool for examiners to 
use so they can avoid evaluation the site. ORIGINALLY,  these 
evaluations were designed to HELP webmasters by pointing out areas 
for improvement.  Stopping the evaluation base on one item does not 
fulfill these goals. A site with a submitted evaluation form is 
helpful even if it is found ineligible for an award.

dave schuppert

--=====================_5571851==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<body>
This date thing is now way out of control.&nbsp; Do you know
of any other USPS position where you can be publicly humiliated because
you don't respond on a 24/7 basis.&nbsp; How many of you have waited
days, weeks, even months to get a response from elected USPS
officers?&nbsp; Do they get chastised? No, they get promoted. 
As a webmaster, and in accordance with the new rules, you could be
singled out by an appointed few for a &quot;reduction in
points&quot; if your site contains A SINGLE DATE THAT IS ONE DAY
OLD.&nbsp; 
Were you told when you took the job of webmaster that you could bring
embarrassment to your squadron if you took a vacation
during the evaluation period and failed to keep a 24/7 website vigil?
 
Common sense has proven NOT to be applied during the
evaluations.&nbsp; I maintain 8 of the Districts Squadron websites. They
are exact clones of each other. There was a 43 point spread
between evaluations of those sites.&nbsp; 2 were not graded because they
linked to a page 
with an automated&nbsp; &quot;Last updated&quot; date which was
not under their control to change but was beyond the 90 day time
limit. 
And the &quot;decision of the judges is final&quot;, no matter how
flawed. 
*************************************************** 
New Guide Lines: 
The no tolerance situation concerns
the websites qualification to be considered in the current Webawards
program.&nbsp; The evaluation sheet indicates that if the website is over
30 days out of date that it will not be evaluated.&nbsp; Less than 30
days will result in a reduction of the points awarded. 
From: WMMILLER@aol.com 
To: usps-webmasters@usps.org, webmaster_forum@usps.org 
Subject: [USPS-Webmasters] Website Requirement #11 
Many websites have an entire year long
calendar of events displayed.&nbsp; That is certainly allowed in this
rule, as long as there is some indication of what events have
already transpired.&nbsp; Many websites have come up with innovative
means to make such a distinction.&nbsp; 
******************************** 
Since there is no directive that this indication must
be on a line item basis,&nbsp; placing an automated date at the top of
the page and a reminder that anything earlier than that is a
&quot;past event&quot;&nbsp; should fulfill the some
indication requirements.&nbsp; Also: Using calendars from
publications excludes the calendar from time limit disqualification.
Example:&nbsp;
<a href="http://dwsmark.com/Clients/CalEx.htm" eudora="autourl">
http://dwsmark.com/Clients/CalEx.htm 
</a>I agree that some regulation on material needs to be imposed, but
these new requirements have gone full scale the other way. They do not
take into considerations Squadrons and Districts who require ExComm
approval for ALL website changes.&nbsp; Not all changes will be made the
night of the event. During the summer there could be a 60 day lag between
meetings. I feel that the 90 day rule would best suit the &quot;proof
of abandonment&quot; which this rule was meant to catch.&nbsp;
Anything else can only be considered a tool for examiners to use so they
can avoid evaluation the site. ORIGINALLY,&nbsp; these evaluations were
designed to HELP webmasters by pointing out areas for improvement.&nbsp;
Stopping the evaluation base on one item does not fulfill these goals. A
site with a submitted evaluation form is helpful even if it is found
ineligible for an award. 
dave schuppert 
</body>
</html>

--=====================_5571851==.ALT--