Flip Flop Flying

Changes?

with 35 comments

I’m currently spending a lot more time doing this blog than typing stuff on the Flip Flop Flyin’ homepage. And although I set out to use flipflopflying.com specifically as a seperate blog, I wonder if that was the best idea. Maybe I might try and find a way to combine FFF and FFFg so the home page of the former incorporates this blog. I wonder…
So, I wondered what you, the readers, thought of this. Do you like having the blog as something that’s seperate to all the pixelly silliness, or would you rather have them combined? Comments, please.

Written by Craig

June 28th, 2005 at 2:45 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

35 Responses to 'Changes?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Changes?'.

  1. I like the blog-announces-life-and-pixelly-silliness approach.

    Whatever you do, don’t lose the RSS.

    Eric

    28 Jun 05 at 3:33 pm

  2. I’m down with whatever, homie.

    Anonymous

    28 Jun 05 at 3:52 pm

  3. I quite like having them seperate, but I think the thing that worries me is that I don’t want the FFF homepage to become a barron wasteland. Maybe that’s the page that needs changing, not this one.

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 3:59 pm

  4. i quite like it seperate. there’s a link to the flyin’ site, which is already choc-a-bloc full of links to other bits and pieces. but then you’ve got billy’s bit there, and if he doesn’t warrant his own seperate site, then why should you? i’ve changed my mind – integrate it!

    andrew

    28 Jun 05 at 4:01 pm

  5. mayby the flipflopflyin needs changes. blog is grate and i love to read it, but i would like more new stuff on flipflopflyin, a lot of new things… :)

    nata

    28 Jun 05 at 4:18 pm

  6. I wonder if keeping them separate allows fff to function sort of like a portfolio–and would integrating the blog change that? (And would you care if so?) I agree the main thing is to keep the RSS feed so we don’t have to remember to come by. I used to have trouble with that…Lazy I guess. Do you have any sense whether different people are looking at the two sites? Are you worried that integrating the blog would clutter up the other page?

    Heather

    28 Jun 05 at 4:23 pm

  7. i vote NON. separate please

    sattva

    28 Jun 05 at 4:30 pm

  8. Obviously, I think a lot about how the FFF and FFFg look. I’m in two minds: I like the simplicity of the blog. I like how it’s got virtually no design, it’s a slightly-fiddled-with Blogger template with a big G at the top. (Although, I’d like to keep the simplicity, but deviate from the template-ness a bit in the future.)
    But I also like how FFF is a big dusty junkshop of stuff. Like Bagpuss with pixels.
    Plus I have that typical Virgo problem: demanding tidiness of myself.
    I guess I’d like it if there was more of a connection between the two. Oh, how I wish I could just be happy with it all and just get on with it…
    (Don’t worry: RSS will stay.)

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 4:36 pm

  9. No matter what you do I’ll keep checking both. It would be kind of neat to see a little more intergration between the two. What does Billy think about all this?

    Thoroughly Amused

    28 Jun 05 at 5:30 pm

  10. I like the way the blog is a little insight into your everyday life (as a blog should be), and flipflopflyin’ is your more prepared creative works. I think it’s a good separation.

    Perhaps if the two pointed at each other a little more, they’d feel less separate. Maybe brand the Flyin’ link on here a bit more, and restore a blog link on Flyin’.

    pauldwaite

    28 Jun 05 at 5:37 pm

  11. Second that.

    Heather

    28 Jun 05 at 6:08 pm

  12. Billy thinks nothing about it. He’s content to rest his front paws on the window ledge and watch the world go by.

    Thanks, Paul. Good points one and all (btw, is your name a bit fancy – Paul d’Waite?)

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 6:15 pm

  13. Third that.

    Andr.

    28 Jun 05 at 6:17 pm

  14. anyone fourth it? anyone? anyone?

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 6:20 pm

  15. If it doesn’t fit, you cant fourth it.

    Skelp

    28 Jun 05 at 6:28 pm

  16. I reckon the two should be seperate…
    Blogs are always good to read, and I guess if it was on the main page of fff it might distract from the pixelly goodness… I’m having a similar problem at the moment (Although obviously on a much smaller scale…) because I have a blog, and a deviantart site, and I’m kind of verging towards stopping the blog in favour of combining the two…

    But I’ve come to the conclusion its best to have them seperate. And I think the same is true for what you do.

    Well, there’s my opinion!

    lonely_orange

    28 Jun 05 at 7:50 pm

  17. Skelp – Ho ho! May the fourth be with you, etc.
    Ms. Orange and everyone – seems the votes are for keeping them seperate… thanks for your opinions, I appreciate them.

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 8:23 pm

  18. I feel like I am late for class…

    Separate please, I – like most above – like being able to dip into both. A good branding that links on each FFF and FFFg to the other would be a wise move.

    It also means you can run ideas but a fairly receptive audience who don’t seem shy to put their ideas forward.

    I just like blogs… like so many people!

    aetheria

    28 Jun 05 at 8:47 pm

  19. That’s a really good point.
    From what I’ve gathered so far since I started FFFg, most of the visitors – commentors, at least – are folks who aren’t “just” Minipops-likers.
    Maybe I should do some more stuff specifically for you lot here. Maybe show you some stuff that isn’t finished or that’s just a seed of an idea.

    And, I don’t say it enough, but I love doing both FFF and FFFg, and I say this most sincerely, I fucking adore knowing that people like what I do.
    This’ll turn into an Oscar speech if I dont press the Login and Publish button any minute now.

    Craig

    28 Jun 05 at 9:13 pm

  20. Speaking as an Apparently Late For Everything reader, well, it’s all good as far as I’m concerned. You do good stuff. They are good times. Good. There, that pretty much exhausts my yearly allowance of that particular adjective.

    Blogs have become odd little things, haven’t they? It’s getting so you can’t open your webeyes without seeing some free-space upstart making the front page of the news, or escape the ever-looming threat of elitism in this mad, crazy, mostly-pointless yet ever-expanding webcircle. (“I’ve been on the web since 1998! Like, before blogs were BORN, man! Nyah-nyah-nyah!”) That’s probably why I hate the word blog. It sounds a little too label-y. Too over-simplified. The web in a can, maybe. I say, well, just do what you do. Web what you web. Enjoy the goodness. Sometimes I suspect that it’s important to take a step back and stop taking “ze webbe” all serious-like.

    Ugh. What a tall box of soap. Listen, don’t fret. It’ll work out. The good stuff nearly always does.

    Christa

    29 Jun 05 at 6:09 am

  21. Another vote for keeping them seperate with links to the other.

    J

    29 Jun 05 at 8:10 am

  22. Seperate, please. As long as it doesn;t affect the frequency and quality of updates to FFF.

    Matt

    29 Jun 05 at 12:11 pm

  23. separate please. the one with the g has its own, strong identity now.

    mama jens

    29 Jun 05 at 12:31 pm

  24. run a feed in some corner of fff about the latest offerings on fffg? and vice versa?

    sorry if this has been suggested already.

    Bushra

    29 Jun 05 at 12:48 pm

  25. Christa – 1998!? you latecomer, you! : )
    I’m not keen on the blog word either. In my view, a blog is a tool.

    Matt – the frequency of FFF stuff will always be the same: that’s to say, when I’ve got less work on, you get more FFF and vice versa. FFFg, though, should stay constantly active.

    Bushra – good call.

    Craig

    29 Jun 05 at 3:15 pm

  26. Paul d’Waite! I never thought about that. Well, I almost did once, sort of, but my dad got all disturbed.

    Naw, it was just a bit of pre-emptive name-spacing, really. I didn’t want to stop the other Paul Waites from getting domain names and Hotmail accounts and things, so I decided to use my middle initial on the internet.

    A quick Google search reveals that they haven’t yet taken advantage of my forethought.

    pauldwaite

    29 Jun 05 at 8:57 pm

  27. Man, if they’re still available, I’d buy them if I were you. How I wish I’d been early enough on the Internet to buy craigrobinson.com.

    Craig

    29 Jun 05 at 9:26 pm

  28. I guess paulwaite.co.uk would be more accurate branding for myself. But could I deal with re-naming my website after three or four years of ‘pauldwaite’?

    Actually, I probably could.

    Maybe ’tis time.

    pauldwaite

    29 Jun 05 at 9:56 pm

  29. Ok, I’ll go against everyone else and say that you should join them up! Both are great sites but I think you lose out by having them seperate as your work really fits in with your personality (it’s like that bit in Ghostbusters at the end when they cross their beams). I would also suggest that you give the site (minipops) a bit of a overhaul, get rid of the frames, tables, spacer gifs, and the navigation grapics, and go xhtml/css, would make a big difference in the loading time and be more user friendly. I need a feed for Billy’s blog too!

    Oh and don’t know if you have already, but Meersalz is quite a nice place and worth a try out for your coffee, near to the Xion on Stargarder Str.

    Cheers

    mootpoints

    30 Jun 05 at 4:21 pm

  30. XHTML/CSS…yes, I really would love to have time to learn that stuff and totally re-code everything. I’ve got myself into a problem having never learned more than I needed to learn to build a basic website and now it’s all creaky and old underneath the surface.

    Meersalz…is that the one between near the newspaper shop and Indian restaurant with the seats and a couple of plants outside?

    Craig

    30 Jun 05 at 4:35 pm

  31. Hi Craig;

    I would like them together. I am still not used to the idea of fff-g, sometimes i forget to check, but I check fff regularly, so, if they were together, I wouldn’t feel like i was missing something. Of course the artwork is great to see, but in conjunction with the writing always makes it more ‘real’, more ‘personal’.

    gosh, im wierd and mushy today.

    yuko

    30 Jun 05 at 5:36 pm

  32. I’m all for the separatedness (I don’t care if the word doesn’t exist, neither does sepErate) of the sites. I have no problems with swinging between the two. They have their own identities and I wouldn’t want a takeover, friendly or otherwise.

    I’m a spelling pedant, me.

    George in Grasse

    30 Jun 05 at 7:23 pm

  33. Yep that’s the same one. There’s also a nice wine shop a couple of doors down from them that also do coffee. Think there’s a coffee shop on Papalallee, Miss. Smilias(?) opposite Papki that I pass quite often and looks nice inside with books and so on… Come to think of it there’s a whole host of coffee shops that you can fall out with!!

    As to the xhtml/css, I’m sure you could pick it up in no time, plenty of resources on the internet, of course it all takes a bit of time. I’d be happy to have a look over it if for you if you wanted, mostly what I’m doing at the moment is updating layouts.

    Cheers

    mootpoints

    1 Jul 05 at 2:35 pm

  34. Yes, Fr. Smillas is lovely.

    Craig

    1 Jul 05 at 6:33 pm

  35. Something like a late comment…
    As long as both are linked, I think you should keep it the same. I mean, people visit your two pages for different reason, the regular one (no g) for your work and the blog one for your personal insight into everyday life.
    Cheers!

    indigobunny

    6 Jul 05 at 3:56 pm

Leave a Reply