> it was I who put the original question out there on what I should do about my web page. and i agree with both your conditions. but i would also venture to say that they don't necessarily have to be met. i just wanted to say that there are other valid reasons for having a web page, even if it is a surface read. for instance, i am a computer programmer, and i use my web page, not only to mess around with, but as a programming tool. During the summer months when i am out of school, i like to keep my programming skills in tact via my page. The content isn't always great, but it gives me good practice just to have something to change around and update. However, I am trying to get some better content, hence the reason for my original request. And I appreciate your helpful words of advice.
>

If you thought my post was helpful, then I'm glad, but I really didn't at all mean to be prescribing criteria that other people should try to meet for their own web sites. Certainly not every web site has to have content with depth, as you've pointed out, and a site doesn't even necessarily have to be updated all that frequently. Those are just personal goals that I'd like to set for putting up a hypothetical web site someday. But what do I know about producing and maintaining a web site, anyway? Zilch, that's what. :-)

Iss "enjoyed learning about the "Know-Nothing" party in American History class" achar