Do people "pass by" plain-text sites?

[Shaken Angel]

On Tue, 29 Jul 1997, KAREN SCHNEIDER wrote:

> On another discussion list, in the midst of  a debate about the
> relative value of graphics on websites, the statement was made
> that "there are MANY,MANY people who will pass a plain, text
> only (no graphics) site right by."  
> 
> Do we actually *know* this?  Or is it a WOM (Word Of Mouth)?

I for one use Lynx for about ninety percent of my WWW browsing, and I get
downright *annoyed* when I pull up a site on Lynx and it just says [IMAGE]
[IMAGE] [IMAGE] or worse yet, "This is optimized for Microsoft Internet
Exploiter.  Please get a REAL BROWSER!"

I often get annoyed when I see sites *with* high graphical content even
when using Netscape.

The way I figure it, most sites with real content are going to be about
eighty per cent text and oftentimes higher than that.  It seems to me that
almost every site with a high graphical content is either commercial fluff
or porn. 

Maybe Filtering Facts should build their own filter that kills sites with
a high graphic content, then.  Heh. :)

-- john f., miami university library systems