Don't click it?

I would like to recommend this website to the class. I feel this website is really interesting and I believe it uses intensive flash to display the visuals. The really amazing thing about this site is that it is against the common "clicking" of your mouse to move around on the website. You will actually be warned when you click on anything!

I believe this website appeals to computer users that use computers on a regularly basis. Also this website would appeal to people that are interested in changes in the technological revolution. The reason I believe this is because of the way the website displays explains that the creator questioned existing habits of interface development and decided to take it to another level.

This website strongly appeals to logos. When using this website, you are pratically going out of your normal computer using interface where nearly everything is controlled by you clicking on links, pictures and objects. Meanwhile, this website argues that there are ways to navigate on a website without clicking.

Dontclickit appeals to pathos in the way it requires you not to click on anything at all. The website will even try to trick you to click on pictures at times. The result will be a warning reminding you that clicking is deeply rooted in you and perhaps a habit created over time. While navagating through this website, you will strive to not click on anything. This will appeal to your emotions, making you fustrated, interested, annoyed, or fascinated. Emotions will vary depending on the person.

Dontclickit appeals to ethos by showing that although clicking is not wrong, it has almost completely taken over computer interfaces these days. This website is shows ways of changing how a person interacts with website interfaces.

Check this website out if you have time.

Example of Blog Post 1

I'd like to recommend the Web Standards Project (WaSP) web site to everyone in the class. The WaSP group aims its site at a range of people who produce content for the World Wide Web, including high-end web developers and people who are just learning how to publish on the Web (like many of us). The "Recent Buzz" section on the home page is blog on which members post ideas and reports about current practices in web design. These posts include a number of critiques of existing sites that don't comply with standards.

What's striking to me about the rhetoric of the page is that WaSP characterizes its efforts as a "fight":

Founded in 1998, The Web Standards Project (WaSP) fights for standards that reduce the cost and complexity of development while increasing the accessibility and long-term viability of any site published on the Web.

While for the most part a page like this appeals to logos, advancing the rational argument that compliance with web standards is objectively better than non-compliance, WaSP's account of its "fight" involves ethical (ethos) and even emotional (pathos) appeals. WaSP argues that people with disabilities are better able to access information on sites that comply with web standards. This is an ethical appeal--the WaSP group is advocating consideration for the disabled. If you read through the "About" section of the site, you'll detect (at least I do) a kind of outrage at the general disregard for standards. The implicit message is, "we're angry about the lack of standards, and we're going into battle to defend them." This anger is part of an emotional appeal--we're expected to be angry, too.

I hope this helps give an example of the kind of thing I'm looking for in your own posts. Remember that can enter the tags for a hyperlink you learned on Friday directly into the Blogger window to create a live link in your post.