In the FAQ they actually do address that and mention they’re reviewing those sites for removal.
htrayl@lemmy.world 3 days ago
A small critique of that project - a large portion of the websites included are simply personal sites for developers - nothing barely more technical than a business card or CV. I would exclude those or categorize them differently, as to me their “usefulness” seems relatively edge case.
tedd_deireadh@lemmy.world 3 days ago
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 2 days ago
They are useful for those people though. You can put a QR code or URL on your business card and it will give people all the information they need for your businessor something.
ripcord@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I don’t think anyone is arguing that having, like, websites are useful. But if they’re not particularly interesting then it doesn’t really fit here.
The point of something like this is generally to come up with the most interesting/creative thing within arbitrary resource limits.
frongt@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
That’s not one of their requirements. You might want to look at a different competition.
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 2 days ago
Yeah i dont get this complaint. This is just a label that people can qualify for, its not a competition.
Taldan@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I clicked on 6 sites
4 were personal portfolio sites
1 was a personal blog
1 was a web design company
Pretty disappointing, and I’m not going to keep clicking on more in the hopes I find something interesting
dandu3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I clicked on random and I got a tic tac toe that’s apparently purpose made. Works fine too