I signed up with CreditExpert several months ago, mainly because Frog freaked me out over my credit score. I had no idea if I had one or what it was like, so I signed up to their reasonably-priced service to find out. As it turns out, my credit score was near perfect so I was pleasantly surprised – especially since Halfords turned me down for a £300 bike loan earlier in the year (wtf?). Anyhoo, the other day I noticed CreditExpert were still charging me for their service so I thought I’d log in and see what was what.
I went to their site – notice how the login button is really, really small.
Now, here I realised that in all the emails CreditExpert sent me when I signed up, my username and password weren’t mentioned. I can only assume my username was:
a) My name
b) My email address
c) A mix of the two
My password could be one of approximately half a dozen words/numbers I use to sign up to stuff, so I tried all the combinations I could think of.
Oh Noes!
Nope, not that then.
Obviously I have no idea what my password is, and since I never received it in an email I’ll have to get a new one. I clicked the “retrieve a new password” button. You’re taken to a screen where you type in your name and your email address – fantastic, email me my details please!
Foiled!
What?! You want what now? A password for my password?!
I can handle my mother’s maiden name, but what about the other box? Obviously in the sign up process I had to give some sort of answer, and type in a security question – but come on, it’s me, of course I typed in the name of an animal. But what animal? I don’t know – it was months ago! You overestimate the power of my memory CreditExpert!
Bumsticks
Damn you CreditExpert!
Popularity: 1% [?]
I’m currently reading Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds by Charles Mackay (available for free from Project Gutenberg here). I’m about to start the chapter entitled “Influence of Politics and Religion on the Hair and Beard” which is quite possibly the best title of any chapter, ever, but unfortunately it’s got nothing to do with what I’d like to say here.
So far Mackay has covered the ‘south sea bubble’, ‘tulipomania’ and various alchemists – he’ll go on to talk about witch mania, haunted houses and the proliferation of duelling. In all of these chapters there is one conspicuous absence – religion. Now Mackay published his book in 1841, some 18 years before Darwin’s Origin of Species (which he apparently held back for about 20 years because he was afraid it would receive a poor reception from what we’d call Creationists). It still annoys me that someone like Mackay, who shows contempt for all the alchemists (even if some of them did discover useful chemical properties) says things like:
“God himself, for his own wise purposes, has more than once undrawn the impenetrable veil which shrouds those awful secrets; and, for purposes just as wise, he has decreed that, except in these instances, ignorance shall be out lot for ever.”
There’s such a massive elephant in the room I keep expecting it to start performing circus tricks.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Okay, so that’s a crap title but it rhymed so I went with it. Remember Compare The Market’s Compare the Meerkat ad? Well, if you needed any proof of its penetration of the national consciousness, it’s caused searches for our furry friends to skyrocket over the last few months:
Competitors confused.com and moneysupermarket haven’t been slow off the mark – they’re bidding on ‘meerkat’ as a search term. Interestingly, comparethemarket.com aren’t:
I find brand bidding pretty interesting so it’s nice to see it’s stretched to bidding on your competitor’s marketing campaigns too. I can also report that all three companies are bidding on ‘confused.com’, all three are bidding on ‘compare the market’ and the only one not bidding on ‘money supermarket’ is comparethemarket.com.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Please click for the full examination:
Popularity: 1% [?]
It’s common knowledge that broadcasting is London-centric and having lived there, I got the impression that most Londoners rarely think about anything outside the M25. Sky New have taken things a step further however, by asking Patrick to go on the telly, then cancelling at the last minute because they didn’t realise he lived outside London.
Eh? You’re not even prepared to have someone travel down for a day? Pretty xenophobic, Sky News. I hope you find someone else to fill the spot, maybe from the office next door?
Popularity: 1% [?]
I was looking through my Analytics just now and saw some pretty awesome things I must have written on my blog. After all, Google sent me some visitors for the following keywords:
chrome vs pikachu
paul and barry vs. aids (1992)
mina anwar
rampaging elephant pics
www.sex nap.com
are the chuckle brothers father and son?
which one of the chuckle brothers is dead
uksnow
Popularity: 1% [?]
A streetlamp:
My car:
Popularity: 1% [?]
Web firms work in different ways and, since I’ve only worked at one, I don’t profess to know what’s best. That’s why I’m writing this post! At some web firms, clients have a direct line to their developer. This means that developers have to talk to clients, manage their projects and field all those incoming phone calls. At other firms, an account manager does all the liasing and the developer just does the work. I’ve always wondered which way is best, so here are some reasons for and against.
Pros!
- The developer knows their subject best. They can answer any questions the client has throughout the build of the website, giving expert advice that you couldn’t get anywhere else.
- If the client wants some minor changes they can ask the developer direct. It’s often quicker than going through an account manager.
- The developer gets a great understanding of the project – there’s literally nothing they don’t know about the client’s business.
- A lot of the project management is taken away from the account manager, so they have more time to do other things like winning new business.
Cons!
- Things get done without the account manager’s knowledge. The account manager is out of the loop.
- One minor change turns into several. Before you know it the project’s overrun because no-one told the client ‘no’. A developer doesn’t have that sort of responsibility.
- A lot of work doesn’t get billed because it never got specced up. The developer works for free.
- The client prefers talking to the developer because they know it gets results, and this ties up the developer’s time when they could be working.
- If the client is unhappy a developer has to field that call. They don’t have an account manager’s experience with that sort of thing and it can all end badly.
- Lines of responsibility blur – it becomes unclear who should contact the client and things start to slip through the cracks.
Conclusion
I tentatively conclude that it’s best for developers to stay in the shadows, or at least have a well-defined roll and level of responsibility when it comes to client management. I’ve probably missed loads of reasons out, so feel free to add your opinion 
Popularity: 1% [?]
