I got this comment at the Best website in the UUA posting. I thought it deserved a full reply.
Hi, I was reading your comments and wondered why you suggested that the Harrisonburg church lose the UUA banner. I ask because itâ€™s a resource that was highly requested from us by Congregational webmasters and Iâ€™m wondering what about it turned you off. Thanks!
UUA Office of Electronic Communication
Here are my top reasons.
- Web designers need to have design control, and imported banners usually clash. This might be mitigated by variety of single-purpose (“visit the UUA website” for example) banners and buttons in different formats. (I chose the World Food Program button from this selection.)
- A “shiney, pretty” link — the part that draws the eye the fastest — shouldn’t pull the reader away from one’s own site. At least not without a desired effect for the first site. (I’m willing to risk a surf-out if you give money to the World Food Programme, but not just so you can browse the UUA — or any other — website. That said, go ahead and give money to the WFP.) A congregational web designer’s first loyalties shoud be with the congregation; a link to the UUA has its place but not as a conspicuous banner.
- The rectangle banner scans “advertisement.” Very 1999.
- That said, I think a lot of the banners are unattractive, and the square banners with UU World covers look squished.
Put positively, I might welcome — for a discrete period — a small button, from a variety of styles, hosted locally but gotten from UUA.org, that directs the visitor to a particular action, like reading the newest UU World or registering for GA. But I still advise people not to use UUA banners on their congregational websites.