3 ms·
I do appreciate your suggestions, but this doesn't have anything to do with my ego. I took up the volunteer above (whose name I don't know) on his offer. Meanwh
by thinkcomp 16y ago
I do appreciate your suggestions, but this doesn't have anything to do with my ego. I took up the volunteer above (whose name I don't know) on his offer. Meanwhile, the site is fairly optimized. That doesn't mean everything is perfect, but it's not like we've totally ignored speed either. You may think the site is slow, but were it not for a lot of details you've ignored, it would be far slower. All I'm saying is that a lot of work has gone into this and you don't have to imply that we're idiots.
Also, 400K isn't all that much; one of our competitors sends over 4.2MB on their home page alone and it's a very professionally-done site. Aside from all of that, if our server configuration needs more looking at, we'll look at it.
It's great to have constructive criticism like the points contained in your comment, but had it been written without the sarcasm and small insults I would have found it that much more compelling.
- qeorge 16y agoTake his advice or not, but please, move those 4 <script> tags from your header to your footer. It would take you 2 minutes and your site would feel 2x as fast. Its a nice site, which could be even nicer with some extra speed, and it won't take you any time.
- thinkcomp 16y agoDone! Thanks for the tip.
- binomial 16y agoI do appreciate your suggestions, but this doesn't have anything to do with my ego. It's great to have constructive criticism like the points contained in your comment, but had it been written without the sarcasm and small insults I would have found it that much more compelling. Sounds like ego to me. There was no sarcasm in his host, and its critical tone is probably warranted when your site takes that long to load.