Home » Chatham-Kent Local News » Library Unveils New Logo
Library Unveils New Logo
New Chatham-Kent Library Logo
Library staff worked with a consultant in the fall of 2010 to design a logo and a variety of other materials related to the system-wide branding, promoting, and marketing of CKPL programs and services.
In the last four years, several Chatham-Kent Public Library(CKPL) locations have undergone internal renovations and/or have been rebuilt to reflect the modern library and the needs of the community.
The CKPL is unveiling its new logo and the tagline “making connections” during Ontario Public Library Week. The new logo suggests the leaves of a book but can also be interpreted as reaching out into the community. The colour scheme incorporates the currently popular blues and greens, and is in keeping with the Municipality of Chatham-Kent’s logo.
As well as positioning the Public Library beyond the traditional notion of a repository for books, the logo reflects the vibrancy and relevancy of CKPL in all of its eleven locations. The fresh new look invites Chatham-Kent residents to visit and check out the new look and feel of our modern Library system.
The official logo is a first for CKPL and Library staff are excited to go forward and market the library based on this fresh new design.
Jim
October 17, 2011 at 11:59 pm
The municipality just changed their logo a year ago, and so did the library. Now they change it again? 3 different ones in little over a year! Wish they would have bought more books instead as they don’t tend to not have as many new releases as other libraries I have been too. That is a lot of letters envelopes and signage to change.
South Kent Voter
October 18, 2011 at 12:06 pm
The logo looks great, but I question the “relevancy” of a public library in 2011. Although I haven’t stepped foot inside any library in 20+ years, I seem to be able to get all the information I need from Google. And should I ever wish to hold a “paper” book again (not likely) I can order it online. A book is not paper and ink and binding — a book is a collection of words, and those words can come in any form. But just as there will always be those who insist that 8-Track Tapes sound better than digital downloads and cars with carburetors run better than EFI, I suppose there needs to be a warehouse for those who prefer old paper books. I’m just not so sure that it should be publicly funded anymore.
Dan
October 18, 2011 at 5:48 pm
You got that right Jim! Another big huge waste of taxpayers dollars but money in the pockets of consultants. I don’t get any of the ‘suggestions’ or ‘interpretations’ that are described in the article, just from looking at that logo. Whoever thought those up sure does have quite the imagination and im sure it is all real in their world LOL. I imagine the logo will need to be redesigned again in a few years as someone will next claim that this is outdated and something ‘fresh’ is needed, so they will hire another consultant. Maybe they should have thought of something that reflects the present and future…maybe it should have been a picture of an ‘e-reader’ or ‘Playbook’…..maybe they should just spend the money on buying more current books to stock the library with!
Progress
October 18, 2011 at 7:31 pm
I actually quite like the logo. I’d like it more if it was done by a local agency, but lets not get too optimistic.
Was it necessary? Ehhh, probably not. I do still think that libraries are important though. Not everyone can afford an e-reader, iPad or kindle. Nor can they afford to order books online. But beyond that, the library provides important programming for our community. From job search workshops to children’s story time, these programs help educate and inform those in our community who really need it.
Our local libraries also offer digital book lending, so if you are lucky enough to have the technology, you can “borrow” books online.
The fact that you haven’t been in a library for 20 years shows just how little you know of these facilities and the services that they offer.
marlee
October 18, 2011 at 8:57 pm
Most of the CK libraries also have volunteers who teach seniors and others how to use computers and host book clubs for seniors. And lend movies.
The Ridgetown Library also does displays of books relevant to activities in the community – for example, during the Festival of Porches & Verandahs they selected books on architecture, on Victorian life and on Victorian cooking.
Whether the logo is great or not, our libraries need our support – use them or lose them.
Brandon
October 18, 2011 at 9:26 pm
I like the logo as well. It is unfortunate that a local company couldn’t have been contracted for it. The reason for the logo change is to make it fit in line with the CK rebranding efforts. It ties it into the municipal rebrand much better than previously.
I hadn’t been in the library for years until earlier this year and I was quite amazed at the changes they’ve made. I think there is definitely still a place for libraries and you can book out e-books now as well. There are also a lot of other useful services that the public library provides as Progress mentioned.
MUNICIPALITYWASTESMONEY
October 18, 2011 at 11:43 pm
This is a clear sign that the taxpayers are not respected in any way. I am sure when it is tax increase/raise time for municipal employees the CK Council will tell you how they may have to cut services to balance the budget and throw out some scary number so that we are all brainwashed into beleiving that a smaller number is really a big accomplishment for them.
Jim
October 19, 2011 at 4:23 am
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge supporter of libraries and go there with my family all the time. Sorry Brandon, but this isn’t inline with Ck rebranding as the library did adopt the new brand, changed everything, than decided to change again. That’s poor planning and looking ahead. That’s the issue.
Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?
October 19, 2011 at 1:21 pm
Our Library logo done by a company from the U.S. Our Municipal logo done by a company from Nova Scotia. Our municipal website done by a company from Toronto. Our new convention centre being managed by a company from Toronto. Is our current municipal administration anti-Chatham-Kent? When looking at the 2010 tenders 60% of contracts went to businesses located outside our municipality. That was over 20 million dollars – how many local jobs did they just give away? That is economic development alright – just not for Chatham-Kent.
Once I heard that the library had contracted a US company to develop their local marketing plan, I stopped supporting the Chatham location. And when I told my employees the story, they, and their families, stopped going as well.
Quite frankly I am shocked that more local residents are not upset with this practice. If I were to follow the example of the municipality I would not shop local, hire local, or require my employees to live in Chatham-Kent. Here is a new tag line to add to the new municipal logo, and I won’t even charge a $58,000 consultant fee, “MCK – WHY SHOP LOCAL? WE DON’T”.
edlaw
October 19, 2011 at 3:03 pm
Let’s start the tally, shall we;
$58,000 for an American consultant for a simple graphic design that several local businesses could have provided (don’t forget $60,000+ to an out-of-province company for advice on where to place tourist attraction road signs), $83,500 to move a house after a planning commission mistake, $900,000 to compensate for an engineers’ study that overlooked a high water table near the new Water Park (1,000 meters from a creek that regularly overflows), $70,000 for an arts and culture website that has no content and links to nothing, not even the Capitol Theatre…… and let’s not even discuss THAT !!!
Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?
October 20, 2011 at 9:16 pm
Wow ED – there were a few in there that I did not even know about! Have you checked out the new $70,000 culture website? OMG – what a joke, 2 years and that budget. Do a Google search for Create CK and their Facebook page even outranks the site. Oh well I guess that is what you get when you give the contract to market and develop a website to a company, who at the time of bidding, did not even have a website of their own. Go through the site, some items are still in test mode, basic design items are totally overlooked, some items do not even line up correctly, and no social media integration. And then to launch the site and not really have have it populated… I wonder if the province, who funded it, are doing any follow up? I would be asking, no demanding, my money back. My 12 year old nephew and his friends could of done a better job. And they would of done for free.
ChanMac
October 20, 2011 at 11:36 pm
Re: Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent? The CreateCK portal has a tough road to hoe, and it has nothing to do with the developers. The portal is dependent on user generated content… i.e. you and I are suppose to populate it with information (hence there’s no information on it yet). Why? So that it will be self-sustainable (i.e. won’t cost more money to maintain). Building a platform like this isn’t the issue, it’s getting people to adopt it and populate it. Which takes time and training.
Only a very small portion of this portal has been launched at this time (this was addressed at the launch, which leads me to believe you didn’t attend.) Why? Because if you unveil a site that has all the bells and whistle blasting right off the bat you’re going to scare the crap out of a community that is already known for being behind the ball when it comes to technology. The folks who are going to use the website the most readily admit that they aren’t the most tech-savvy bunch – they have requested help and for features to be unveiled slowly. Kudos to the developers for understanding this and actually caring about their audience. I’m looking forward to some of the more advanced features that were mentioned at the launch and understand why they’ll be rolled out in phases.
If this is approached properly, I anticipate that the CreateCK portal will be quite a useful tool.
James Wright
October 21, 2011 at 2:14 pm
it has everything to do with the developers. The web site looks crappy and offers little. Sixty thousand dollar budget what went wrong and w hy?!
http://artsandculture.ca/b/potensiacorp/
free haircuts?????
Lydia
October 21, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Chanmac you are absolutely correct, the portal will now have a tough road to hoe, it looks like it really started off on the wrong foot. I took the liberty of calling 3 web development companies, one in Chatham, one in Sarnia, and one in Windsor (I’m recently retired and have time on my hands). I asked the individuals to give me a ball park quotation on what they would charge to reproduce artsandculture.ca. The highest number that was discussed was $9,000, no where near $70,000. And if you have any doubts please feel free to perform the same exercise.
Whoever paid for the portal, the city, Trillium or Theatre-Kent, got ridiculously overcharged. There should be some sort of accountability, an investigation maybe. I do not agree with some of “anti’s” comments but you must admit they have a point. I don’t know much about construction, but I know $2,000 would be too much to pay for a hammer. Having looked at both the “portal” and the website of the company that developed it, I must admit that the words sparse and non-functional come to mind. It looks like your company does some sort of web development. Can you honestly say that you would ever charge one of your clients that much, for that website?
ChanMac
October 21, 2011 at 8:46 pm
A project like this is way out of my league – I help small businesses understand WordPress – a basic content management system so they can at least get on the web and start promoting their businesses affordably. I know when a project is beyond my scope and would never even try to tackle something like this. When you called the local companies and asked them to quote for a project like this did you ask them how they planned to build the thing? Because $9,000 sounds like a site that’s based off of open source software… a custom-coded site for something of this complexity is going to cost a lot. I’d assume that’s why the price tag is so big.
Is what you see now worth $70 grand… no. But it’s not done so why judge it now? When the whole thing is up and running then ask me. Again, if you’d been at the launch you would know this – why are people so quick to attack something when they only have selective information? Potensia flat out said the site is not finished now, but that it needed to be introduced to the public in order to start populating it with information. Content is the main focus of my business and believe me, getting content from one person is hard, trying getting content from 200 different organizations before a launch deadline… impossible. So instead of waiting even longer to launch the thing, CreateCK and Potensia obviously made the call to unveil the bare minimum so they could at least start the process.
As I said in my last comment, the developers shared a long list of features that are not live yet because they’re trying to figure out how the target audience is going to use the thing.
Granted, Potensia’s profile is cruddy, it’s obviously a test profile that someone forgot to update… but that’s what you get when you’re forced to launch a working website. Stuff is going to be broken. Just give them a chance, is that really too much to ask?
Jealousy
October 21, 2011 at 1:36 am
Harsh words “Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?” We know your nephew would do the site for free, but would you? Really, would you? You wouldn’t have charged that price? Just because the selected company didn’t have a site, doesn’t mean their bid wasn’t better than other bids. Jealousy makes people say things they don’t really mean. Remember that those who throw stones shouldn’t live in glass houses. The site is built well, it isn’t simply frilly design, but you already know that don’t you?
Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?
October 21, 2011 at 2:18 pm
Ha ha – looks like “Jealousy” might of been posting “under the influence”. The portal is a direct reflection of the company that developed it, look at their own website as of 10:15am today: http://www.potensiacorp.com/contact.html
broken contact form
http://www.potensiacorp.com/community.html
great page!
Half of their own site does not even function probably, did anyone think the portal would be different?
Look at the Potensia listing on the portal http://artsandculture.ca/b/potensiacorp/
they are offering free hair cuts? They claim in their listing “we create the best websites in the universe “, someone should be suing them for false advertising – lol. Not sure who paid for the portal, but if I were them I would be looking into some sort of 30 day return policy! The portal…the wifi network..the data centre… looks like someone might of over promised and under delivered on all these projects.
Jealousy
October 21, 2011 at 6:54 pm
Actually “Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?” I believe I am speaking very logically. Bashing local businesses is foolish in my opinion, particularly for someone such as yourself who obviously has intricate knowledge of many local businesses.
Potensia is a highlight of Chatham-Kent not a company to insult.
Judging by your anger, I would guess you are more than a concerned citizen. Hence “Jealousy.” The next time you slander another business for their hard work, I recommend you use your real name. I know I’m being hypocritical, but I’m not bashing someone’s work. Hypothetically, if you feel this project was overpriced, what would you have quoted in a bid?
My guess is those in the know can already guess who you are based on your comments, and mean spirited bashing of others who do much for our community is not a great way to represent yourself or any business or organization you might be associated with. At least in my opinion.
Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?
October 21, 2011 at 10:03 pm
Jealousy it is funny that you keep asking what I would bid on a project like this? Looks like Lydia already did that homework for you. And since when did telling the truth become “bashing” or “slander”? No one is making any of this up, you can go to the sites and look for yourself.
Look at the portal, 70,000 for a project and no one even inserted the content for the terms of use or privacy policy under the sign up area. It is one thing after another, what kind of amateur hour stuff is this?
I am in no way shape or form angry at all. I think it is comical, border line hysterical, how everyone can now see exactly what kind of job was done. And trust me the community of Chatham-Kent has given way more to the coffers of Potensia then Potensia will every give to CK.
Anyway I think we are way off topic, this will be my last post on this topic. Heading off to get a haircut, know anyone good?
Common Sense
October 20, 2011 at 1:40 am
How about some facts.
Only 2 Toronto firms bid on running the convention centre.
No Chatham-Kent firms bid on the logo.
Hmm
Lack of Common Sense
October 20, 2011 at 4:55 pm
You are absolutely correct. There were however many local companies at the meeting to discuss the RFP. Once they saw the absolutely insane process & conditions they would have to go through to even bid on the contract, they did walked away laughing. I own a few local companies and we bid on many local contracts, truth of the matter is that we are bidding on less and less. The process is a manifestation of bureaucracy. The municipality has got to stop thinking RFP and start thinking ROI. Councillors will tell you they have this process in place to avoid price fixing, and that if they only use local companies that it will hinder them from bidding for jobs outside the municipality. And my favourite line… “that is how all the other municipality operate.”
Here is a thought – be cutting edge and don’t do it because that is the way everyone else does it. Hire local even if it is slightly more expensive, guess what – that money stays in your tax base. And if you are worried about price fixing, use your purchasing department to do more then just collect RFP’s. The handful of local companies that bid on contracts outside of CK are the minority, the majority of your small businesses are the ones that are getting beat up by this process.
Quite frankly the municipality will always waste money, regardless of who is in charge, I have accepted that fact. But for the sake of simple reason, waste it with the businesses that are located in CK before they relocate somewhere else.
jim
October 20, 2011 at 1:43 am
Hey Jim, you keeping notes or is that just off the top of your head? I find the debate about what we view as wasteful quite interesting. It’s easy to sit here and question every decision but reality is there are just so many being made. Are there some extra mistakes that shouldn’t have happened? Probably. I don’t have the answer. i work in government and I try to use my program budget to the best of my ability to help fund as much community engagement as possible. Is that good enough? I know I’m working hard and doing lots of good things. But would people notice if I stopped? I guess we need to see value in these types of things to help justify the costs in our head. Logo’s, planning documents, and administrative tasks aren’t really exciting things to get behind. I really would of preferred to see them take that 60 grand and have a huge literacy campaign/movie series/author signings…….the list is endless. Logos aren’t. They just change.
Rob
October 20, 2011 at 4:29 am
I think the entire concept of “branding” is outdated.
In a world super-saturated with “Brands” – how many brands do you love? What brands really mean anything to you? Every Muni in Canada has some fancy logo or brand with swooshes and patches and swirls and little lighthouses, or ships, or clock towers… and they all have nice little slogans that say they’re a nice place to live… and they are all incredibly the same and they are all completely forgettable.
People in CK seem to like quoting Seth Godin, so here’s his take on branding…
I agree with him. But how does this relate to dollars being spent on graphic emblems of green and blue page-sort-of-thingys? What is that – or any other logo supposed to mean to me?
Apple has a brand. And I believe Apple is one of the last companies that will ever have a brand that really means anything to people. New brands don’t usually stick. The world is over-saturated.
There are a few reasons that Apple has a true brand – and the reason is – IMHO – that it’s the people who buy Apple products that branded the company. The customer branded Apple – not the other way around.
Anyone looking to develop a brand needs to look at Seth’s equation above, and figure out how to maximize it and sustain it.
This concept of branding being little graphics or slogans is ridiculous. It’s the crap people sell to boards of organizations that are just going through the motions. “You gotta have a BRAND” they’ll tell you. “We gotta hava brand” you say back to each other.
I say that’s pure crap.
Your customers brand you based on the equation above… and they’re doing it right now.
Godin quote above comes from the article: The Brand Formula
Jim.
October 20, 2011 at 12:37 pm
Hey great points and insight. I think we do need logos, patches and swirlys. You just have to do more than that. Letterheads and doorways have to have something on them, preferably similar. But what turns you into a “brand” is how you “walk the walk”. Governments are usually selling what a great job they’re doing. How many “economic action plan” signs did you see? Across the country that would have cost millions in essentially awhat was a marketing exercise. I could have designed the logo for 500$ and I bet in a lineup of others you couldn’t tell the amateur.
edlaw
October 20, 2011 at 2:28 pm
Absolutely, Rob !! “Branding” seems to be an excuse to start a “project” that needs a “project manager” with a budget that then justifies a consultant that recommends a study that requires a focus group that suggests a vision that begins a process which drags on and on and on and on and on, all creating the illusion that something is being done…………
ChanMac
October 20, 2011 at 11:16 pm
If the thumb up feature was still here, I would thumb you up Rob (ps.. can you bring the thumb up feature back?)
Brenda
October 21, 2011 at 10:33 pm
yes can we have the thumbs up/thumbs down back? It’s really hard to be passive-agressive without it.
Rob
October 22, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Ha Ha… love it!
I’ve removed the thumbs gadget for the time-being because as some of you know we’re making considerable changes to CKDP and the network it sits on.
As we get ready to launch new a new set of sites we are scaling back plugins and other things that are resource-heavy (which the thumbs plugin is), until we know how everything will behave together, identify potential conflicts etc.
If we find that everything is working nicely together and pages are loading quickly etc. we will start turning that kind of stuff back on.
So for the time being you’re stuck with Passive or aggressive. lol
Hope you both like the new stuff we have coming – you both actually played roles in it’s creation.
Brenda
October 26, 2011 at 4:36 am
For some reason Rob, your post below doesn’t have a reply button? I’m replying anyway…
Hope you both like the new stuff we have coming – you both actually played roles in it’s creation.>>>
I’m intrigued…and a little afraid…do I need to figure out how to mask my IP address? lol
As far as branding, I am personally so tired of hearing ‘you need to work on your branding’(meaning a fancy website & a cute logo).
No I don’t, I need to work on my product, make it the best I can, make things people want to buy at a fair price to them & fair profit for myself and enjoy the process.
Rob
October 26, 2011 at 5:49 am
Here here!
And no, I already have your IP address. lol – but you played a role when you participated in a discussion here on CKDP back in…. I wanna say March.
Geez time flies…
(Don’t know why there’s no reply button. Weird.)
Brandon
October 20, 2011 at 2:06 am
As someone who runs a local design studio, we never saw the tender for the logo design and I watch regularly and am on the email list with the municipality to receive RFPs which I never actually receive. It’s unfortunate but seems to be a common trend.
Question
October 20, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Imagine the number of jobs our municipality could create or save if they spent all of this money in Chatham-Kent.
Putting the hundreds of thousands the Muni has spent in recent years on various logos and other marketing materials back into Chatham-Kent would help businesses survive and thrive, or the Muni could have simply created a position for a graphic designer.
Could you imagine the graphic designer showing up to their first day of work at a $50,000 per year job and the Municipality had 3 logos to be designed? What would that employee do for the other 51 weeks of the year. Good money for a job that could be done in less than a month, for a couple thousand bucks (or less) here.
And you’re right Brandon, not only are we hiring companies outside of Chatham-Kent, Muni isn’t even considering companies within our borders.
Apparently our “brand” is that we have no tech minded, educated, or talented individuals in Chatham-Kent that can do these jobs. That’s a more powerful brand than a logo.
Jim
October 20, 2011 at 9:21 pm
The only local businesses that stand out to me are the Heyinks and the digging of everywhere in town. More manual labour tenders rather than intellectual ones? Does our community have a ” brain drain”?
Brandon
October 20, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Rob made some great points. There is a misconception on what are brand is. Most people equate a logo and a brand as being the same thing. It’s not. A logo is one aspect of a brand. A brand is the persona of a company. It’s people’s perception of the company and how the company acts. A brand is the company’s overall personality. As Rob mentioned, you see that done very well in Apple who developed a lifestyle.
When you see reports of $60,000 to develop a brand we need to keep in mind that isn’t just for a logo design. It’s a planned strategy.
Jim
October 21, 2011 at 3:03 am
By planned strategy, doing it once a year for three years I’m sure you would agree is a quite poor strategy.
Michael C
October 21, 2011 at 8:56 am
Some really good stuff here. But I am really saddened by the comments on red tape and those from people like Brandon who are trying to work within the community but are being thwarted by the community, I think it is time for some of you to stop telling Muni staff that you want to help, and start telling your Councillors.
Richard Florida had a great piece yesterday on why start ups fail and why some succeed, but really it is about the attitude of all levels of government. I urge everyone to read it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/10/the-spread-of-start-up-america-and-the-rise-of-the-high-tech-south/246916/
Kevin Bechard
October 22, 2011 at 12:19 am
Chatham Kent already has a web portal in place.
http://www.chatham-kent.ca/default.htm
As a person who has created many web portals for numerous reasons I simply cannot understand why we would not use the same technology and have this new web portal integrated into this already existing site.
Perhaps one of the people who put this in place could enlighten me as to why?
ChanMac
October 22, 2011 at 4:19 pm
I think the Chatham-Kent website is being overhauled right now, I seem to remember hearing that somewhere… not sure by who or what it will look like, but hopefully it’s a little easier to use.
Kevin Bechard
October 25, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Chantelle
Are you one of the people who put the new web portal in place? If so did you consider utilizing the same web technologies for all of CK’s needs to eliminate duplication of costs?
ChanMac
October 26, 2011 at 2:21 am
Kevin,
I don’t have anything to do with the portal’s development, first time I saw it was at the launch. I just like the idea of this kind of tool and can see it being really useful if it works out. Plus it was done by a local company, which is what we all complain about… so I think we should at least give it a chance.
Should these “portals” all be developed using similar web technologies… depends what you mean? I think the importance is in the sharabilty of the content (I’m making up words, but bare with me). Facebook, like it or not, is on a mission to colonize the web – and it goes well beyond the “like” buttons you see on websites. So why reinvent the wheel? Develop our various localized networks, however that may be, but let’s tie them to the Facebook API, let’s make it easy to share, discuss, and spread information, fluidly between all of these portals and Facebook itself. By all means, don’t make it dependent on Facebook, but at least make it compatible. Make it easy to find what you’re looking for, whether it’s on CreateCK or some other municipal site.
Now, I don’t know a whole lot about the API, other than Facebook likes to change it constantly, which is a pain for development (ie work, ie cost), but I’m sure there’s something worth looking into there?
Rob
October 26, 2011 at 4:12 am
I feel that as convenient as Facebook makes interaction, there are serious drawbacks to tying everything we do online into their terms and policies.
Create CK’s (web portal) future depends on the arts community pitching in and making a conscious decision to make it what it’s intended to be. Fancy design, cool functions and social integration are not going to be THE deciding factors. The actions of our local arts community, and the commitment they put into the site will make the difference.
Another reason I would think twice about heavy reliance on Facebook integration is that – once it hits Facebook, your replies, comments and discussions end up taking place there… on Facebook – where it quickly drops out of view and out of mind. Keep the content and the conversation happening on artsandculture.ca, and you have a permanent and well-rounded resource for users inside and outside CK to harvest. – Left in comment strings on FB – it’s gone forever in under an hour.
Plus, if Create CK ever needs future funds for new or additional programming etc, it will probably find itself in a position of allowing advertising or sponsorship – so how will the sponsors like the traffic remaining over on FB (viewers viewing Facebook’s ads), i/o viewing their ad/sponsor presence on the portal itself?
I say to support local we should build local and collaborate local, in our own space. Leverage Facebook for our purposes certainly, but let the benefit return to us, not Facebook.
Brandon
October 22, 2011 at 4:54 pm
I think one if the main reasons it isn’t integrated into the existing municipal portal is because that portal isn’t built to handle the functionality of this new project. A second reason would be that the municipal site is closed in that the general public are not free to contribute to it like CreateCK.
As Chantielle pointed out, the CreateCK project is not in it’s completed state. It’s a project that requires content to be successful and that content can’t appear until its opened to the public. Because of that you’re seeing a site that appears empty because it’s in it’s infancy. Give it time.
I commend Potensia for the time and work they’ve put into it. I wasn’t one of the companies that Lydia contacted for a quote but I know that $9,000 is way under-estimated. Taking shots at the company that built it by making comments about their own website is pretty unprofessional. I’m in the industry and know that our own website tends to be the last thing we update because we put our clients projects first.
This conversation however has gotten completely derailed from the original article topic…
Just Wondering
October 24, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Hey Is MCK anti-Chatham-Kent?
What is wrong with the Data Centre in Chatham. Have you toured the facility. Are you aware that it is the First Pubicly Announced Leed Gold Certified Data Centre available to the public in Canada. Look up Chatham Kent Data Centre and Fluent Engineering.
Remember when dealing with a data centres clients do not want big flashy signs and huge advertising blitzes. Data Centre’s are by design low key.
ChanMac
October 26, 2011 at 11:57 am
I agree – it’s all about getting the content on there and getting people committed to to adopting the site.
Like I said, I don’t know much about the API and how deeply you have to be intertwined with Facebook to enable more fluent sharing, but I agree – the content and conversation should stay on artsandculture.ca. Facebook has all kinds of it’s own problems, but the site does sharing really well. I just wonder if there isn’t someway to make it easier to share information between a local portal, like CreateCK and your established Facebook profile.
Thinking back to Kevin’s question about various local portals – If there are going to be different portals that rely on engagement and user-generated content, they need to make that easy. I don’t want to log into three different sites, build three different profiles, etc in order to use the various portals. In that sense, yes, I hope that the various sites are somehow built to function together, because that would be really exciting and useful. If there are other portals in development, which I honestly don’t know
(ps… I think that the comments now know where to put your reply… I didn’t have a reply button for the stream that I was participating in above, so let’s see if my comment magically knows were to go)
ChanMac
October 26, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Arggg.. my theory was foiled.
Rob
October 26, 2011 at 1:26 pm
I had new platform set to only allow nested comments 5 deep. Changed it – should work right now. – THX
Michael C
October 26, 2011 at 1:37 pm
I am glad to see that people in the know are making positive comments, and I am glad to know where the negative comments are coming from.
I am no geek, quite the opposite, but I do want this portal to work because it could become an important tool in the cultural community.
Do I see room for improvement? Yes I do, but as ChanMac says, this is in early stages yet. I am going to work with the designers to make sure it does what we need it to do.
Hopefully when we are finished it will be a huge database of everything arts and culture in CK.