If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Courant Blogs)   A candidate for the Connecticut legislature spent $59.05 of his own money to set up an Internet website the state would have spent $180,000 on   (courantblogs.com) divider line 168
    More: Asinine, Connecticut Legislature, Connecticut, internet, Mr. Rochambeau, East Hartford, web sites  
•       •       •

16304 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 May 2012 at 9:45 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-08 04:55:07 PM
Let's see how long it takes for this site to get Farked.

http://rochambeautrail.com/
Link
 
2012-05-08 05:16:56 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-05-08 05:19:02 PM
Let Wikipedia be your guide. It's almost never worng.

/Like textbooks
//OK, we're all farked
///and worng
 
2012-05-08 05:23:32 PM
Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.
 
2012-05-08 05:40:27 PM

Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.


True, but a $180k sounds incredibly exorbitant. I mean, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this was an incredibly politically savvy move.
 
2012-05-08 05:56:27 PM

RichieLaw: Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.

True, but a $180k sounds incredibly exorbitant. I mean, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this was an incredibly politically savvy move.


"Politically savvy"? This is the kind of stunt that yokel know-nothing candidates pull to get press coverage, and is remembered for about three seconds. Also, when you tell people things like "geez, Wikipedia already has all the information we need", you look like an imbecile.
 
2012-05-08 06:06:40 PM

RichieLaw: Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.

True, but a $180k sounds incredibly exorbitant. I mean, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this was an incredibly politically savvy move.


It would have been more politically savvy to create a website that actually completes the goal of the legislation.
 
2012-05-08 06:21:15 PM

Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.


Looks like that was part of the plan:

"It's the least I could do," he said in his statement. "With Connecticut's portion of the cost ($90,000) coming from a manufacturing grant fund meant to create jobs in the State, I thought it important to keep that money available for what it was intended, rather than have it frittered away Hartford Style in a boondoggle website that few will care about and fewer will visit."
 
2012-05-08 07:11:20 PM
Looks like they should have spent more on a developer
 
2012-05-08 08:04:00 PM
Well, it takes a month or so for the public comment period. Then the bids, where they have to make sure that if a female/minority owned company puts in a spectacularly overpriced bid, they accept it. Then there's the mandatory review for ADA to make sure there are wide enough wheelchair ramps on both sides of the URL.

This was really quite a racist/sexist/ageist/ableist thing that the legislator did with his $60.
 
2012-05-08 08:25:41 PM

dahmers love zombie: Well, it takes a month or so for the public comment period. Then the bids, where they have to make sure that if a female/minority owned company puts in a spectacularly overpriced bid, they accept it. Then there's the mandatory review for ADA to make sure there are wide enough wheelchair ramps on both sides of the URL.

This was really quite a racist/sexist/ageist/ableist thing that the legislator did with his $60.


not sure if kidding, or incredibly stupid
 
2012-05-08 08:32:16 PM

Kazan: dahmers love zombie: Well, it takes a month or so for the public comment period. Then the bids, where they have to make sure that if a female/minority owned company puts in a spectacularly overpriced bid, they accept it. Then there's the mandatory review for ADA to make sure there are wide enough wheelchair ramps on both sides of the URL.

This was really quite a racist/sexist/ageist/ableist thing that the legislator did with his $60.

not sure if kidding, or incredibly stupid


I think the kidding is obvious. A wheelchair ramp is only required on one side of the URL.
 
2012-05-08 08:52:32 PM
It'd be a real shame if wildly inaccurate facts somehow ended up on that wiki page along with randomly selected images from Wikipedia's pages about infections diseases and sexual deviancy.
 
2012-05-08 08:53:34 PM
So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.
 
2012-05-08 08:56:03 PM
Also, the whole point of the proposed website is to promote tourism in the state. Wikipedia hardly does that, and if you tried to turn it into an ad for tourists it'd be reverted for not having a neutral point of view. This guy is really just a moron showing that he can register a domain name.

Marketing
Web Design
Hosting
Web Programming
Upkeep
Oversight

None of these things come cheaply, moron.
 
2012-05-08 09:10:19 PM
The website sucks. I mean really.

Fubini: Also, the whole point of the proposed website is to promote tourism in the state. Wikipedia hardly does that, and if you tried to turn it into an ad for tourists it'd be reverted for not having a neutral point of view. This guy is really just a moron showing that he can register a domain name.

Marketing
Web Design
Hosting
Web Programming
Upkeep
Oversight

None of these things come cheaply, moron.


You forgot Ad-Words, social media (facebook likes), and $5 deluxe subscriptions.
 
2012-05-08 09:34:58 PM

GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.


What f*cking tourism web site for a state needs a dedicated server and a full time webmaster? Were you frozen in 1998 and just woke up?
 
2012-05-08 09:39:30 PM

Babwa Wawa: GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.

What f*cking tourism web site for a state needs a dedicated server and a full time webmaster? Were you frozen in 1998 and just woke up?


Hi, I'd like to introduce you to speculation. Speculation, Babwa Wawa.
 
2012-05-08 09:51:59 PM

GAT_00: Babwa Wawa: GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.

What f*cking tourism web site for a state needs a dedicated server and a full time webmaster? Were you frozen in 1998 and just woke up?

Hi, I'd like to introduce you to speculation. Speculation, Babwa Wawa.


Oh shut up, you partisan cock. You know damn well you'd be hailing this like the second coming of Jeebus if the guy had a D in front of his name.
 
2012-05-08 09:52:00 PM

GAT_00: Babwa Wawa: GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.

What f*cking tourism web site for a state needs a dedicated server and a full time webmaster? Were you frozen in 1998 and just woke up?

Hi, I'd like to introduce you to speculation. Speculation, Babwa Wawa.


Actually, I'm well versed with this bullshiat - I live right outside Hartford. Let's introduce you to google. Google, GAT_00. GAT_00, google. This is - quite literally - $180k to set up a web site about a trail over the course of the next seven months.

It's a boondoggle at best. At worst, considering how dirty our politics are, it's ten-fold payback for a campaign donation.
 
2012-05-08 09:52:51 PM

scottydoesntknow: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 600x513]


Glad to this was already covered
 
2012-05-08 09:53:17 PM

Cagey B: RichieLaw: Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.

True, but a $180k sounds incredibly exorbitant. I mean, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this was an incredibly politically savvy move.

"Politically savvy"? This is the kind of stunt that yokel know-nothing candidates pull to get press coverage, and is remembered for about three seconds. Also, when you tell people things like "geez, Wikipedia already has all the information we need", you look like an imbecile.


And the best part? He's now squatting on the site, so good luck attempting to have a site named RochambeauTrail.com. I wonder if he even understands the concept of "Wikipedia vandalism?"

Probably not. He's a two-bit moron from Wallingford. He's also a Republican. Not much more needs to be said, really.
 
2012-05-08 09:53:49 PM

GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.


Application development. The state already has infrastructure to host it.
 
2012-05-08 09:55:04 PM
Somehow I imagine part of the vision was to have some historians add Connecticut specific information and little known facts after doing some research. That costs money (too bad it wasn't in Medieval times, there's a thread about halfway down the page about somebody looking for work in that field), professional web design costs some, but even with original research, photos and design $180K seems a bit much.

/Paid $75k of YOUR TAX DOLLARS for two years worth of original wildlife field research, this shouldn't cost even near that figure
 
2012-05-08 09:55:24 PM
These idiots don't even think when they vote for things anymore, all this guy did was highlight that.
 
2012-05-08 09:55:31 PM

Fubini: Also, the whole point of the proposed website is to promote tourism in the state. Wikipedia hardly does that, and if you tried to turn it into an ad for tourists it'd be reverted for not having a neutral point of view. This guy is really just a moron showing that he can register a domain name.

Marketing
Web Design
Hosting
Web Programming
Upkeep
Oversight

None of these things come cheaply, moron.


As a software engineer for a web development company who expects his paychecks on time, "this", but let me also suggest to the great State of Connecticut that our firm will happily complete this project for half the amount reportedly budgeted.

25%?

20%.

OK, 10%, if we're not developing the creative and you let us pick the CMS.
 
2012-05-08 09:57:33 PM
sure $60 isn't the final cost, but anyone looking for a brochure site should be able to find a high school or college senior willing to do it well for a couple grand at most. At the very least his stunt should pay some dividends when he sells them back the domain name.
 
2012-05-08 09:57:43 PM

gingerjet: GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.

Application development. The state already has infrastructure to host it.


What development? This is text on a webpage. Information only. Template + text = 5 minutes. We can generously allow a few thousand dollars for web design and graphics and still come in at about 2% of the proposed cost.
 
2012-05-08 09:57:43 PM
Apparently to get a Congressional website you are forced to choose from a list of professional web services companies which charge a minimum of $20000.

Your government at work.
 
2012-05-08 09:58:04 PM
The state already has a website dedicated to tourism.

http://www.ctvisit.com/

They honestly think it would cost them 180k to add a page about a farking trail on to that website? Or do they want a complete different website that nobody will go to because you aren't going to visit the state for simply one trail. Honestly this is a stupid waste of money that only retards like Gat support.

The tourism site already farking lists the trail for fark's sake.

http://www.ctvisit.com/Properties/Summary?propertyId=3949

Seriously, how can anybody support this 180k. Stop being an idiot Gat.
 
2012-05-08 09:59:59 PM

Babwa Wawa: GAT_00: Babwa Wawa: GAT_00: So I don't see anyone explaining why the cost was this amount. Did the cost include maybe a dedicated server and yearly salary for a design/maintenance person, or maybe physical renovations to the location in question, things like that? I just see angry old guy who can't explain.

What f*cking tourism web site for a state needs a dedicated server and a full time webmaster? Were you frozen in 1998 and just woke up?

Hi, I'd like to introduce you to speculation. Speculation, Babwa Wawa.

Actually, I'm well versed with this bullshiat - I live right outside Hartford. Let's introduce you to google. Google, GAT_00. GAT_00, google. This is - quite literally - $180k to set up a web site about a trail over the course of the next seven months.

It's a boondoggle at best. At worst, considering how dirty our politics are, it's ten-fold payback for a campaign donation.


I like how people get angry when I have the nerve to ask what the money would actually be spent on.
 
2012-05-08 10:00:53 PM
hehe, "internet website." Subby sounds like my gramma,
 
2012-05-08 10:01:57 PM
Headline: "Rochambeau, Part II: Candidate Pays $59.05 To Set Up History Website The State Would Spend $180,000 On"

Omitted reality: "...to spend up to $180,000..." (emphasis mine)

Some of you may find this hard to believe but it wasn't likely that they'd spend the whole amount to do it. Its not like some check was wrote out and handed to someone or something, that was just the amount they budgeted for it. Whatever doesn't get spent is kept in the general fund or whatever fund it was earmarked from.

And yes, earmarking that much money for something like this is silly. To me its just another example of the white-hairs in government passing silly legislation about "the email machine" they can't even begin to understand.
 
2012-05-08 10:02:27 PM

RichieLaw: Osomatic: Call me wacky, but perhaps on the state's version there would have been something other than a single link to Wikipedia.

True, but a $180k sounds incredibly exorbitant. I mean, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this was an incredibly politically savvy move.


Agreed. Even if it was sort of a "Look, we can spend 10 grand and make a really awesome site, but not 180 farking thousand", I think the statement was powerful and funny and very smart. As a "omg give poor people more money" type of person, even I thought that was way too much money for one stupid website.
 
2012-05-08 10:02:41 PM
A little foolish & simplistic? Absolutely! But I don't think that's the point here. As several of the IT/web design geeks have pointed out, it should NOT cost $180K for a website about an obscure tourist attraction. There's no way in hell that it costs that much money.
 
2012-05-08 10:03:03 PM
There was only one user story in the project backlog, and it went "As a Connecticutian, I want to have a website about the Rochambeau Trail so that I can look at it."

The only acceptance criteria were "there is a website" and "cost less than $180,000".

Project was determined to have met all requirements by the second daily scrum meeting.
 
2012-05-08 10:03:04 PM
$180,000? Wow, I need to start bidding on more government work. Good for this guy, this was an obvious example of severe government waste. Even though he is a dirty Republican. :)
 
2012-05-08 10:04:32 PM

magneticmushroom: hehe, "internet website." Subby sounds like my gramma,


He capitalized "Internet", too. I'll bet he uses the word "cyberspace".
 
2012-05-08 10:04:37 PM
If the guy is out to prove that you get what you pay for, then he certainly did.

Nice to see they are teaching developing in kindergarten,,,
 
2012-05-08 10:04:41 PM
Wow... I thought this was flipping awesome until I actually went to the site. 10 minutes in frontpage would have actually resulted in a decent site.. this is shiat.

fark this guy.... but fark the state harder for wasting money on bs.
 
2012-05-08 10:05:09 PM

burning_bridge: Some of you may find this hard to believe but it wasn't likely that they'd spend the whole amount to do it. Its not like some check was wrote out and handed to someone or something, that was just the amount they budgeted for it. Whatever doesn't get spent is kept in the general fund or whatever fund it was earmarked from.


No, the person in charge of spending that budget would try to spend every dime to prevent his budget from being slashed the following year. That's simply how budgets tend to work (in the private sector as well).

Awesome website. Imagine if every government website was so amazingly streamlined!
 
2012-05-08 10:05:18 PM
And all the work done this entire year by that same government? Worth $87 total, not the $24 million it actually cost the taxpayers.
 
2012-05-08 10:05:20 PM

I_Am_Weasel: Kazan: dahmers love zombie: Well, it takes a month or so for the public comment period. Then the bids, where they have to make sure that if a female/minority owned company puts in a spectacularly overpriced bid, they accept it. Then there's the mandatory review for ADA to make sure there are wide enough wheelchair ramps on both sides of the URL.

This was really quite a racist/sexist/ageist/ableist thing that the legislator did with his $60.

not sure if kidding, or incredibly stupid

I think the kidding is obvious. A wheelchair ramp is only required on one side of the URL.


They do have to make sure the bidder's RFP complies with federal guidelines not to link with potential terrorist sites and doesn't discriminate against minority servers.
 
2012-05-08 10:05:46 PM
180k is an insane price. If you want to go fancy:

8-10k to a history grad student to research/write the content over the summer. This is of course overpaying, but it keeps some grad student off food stamps for a summer.
2k for photos, diagrams, and perhaps some photoshop work to a graphics artist on contract
10k to a web monkey to make the website and get a service contract where you get X hours of updates
2k to buy the guy who runs the state website a new server solely for this website (not that it needs it)
15 dollars to register the domain name for a couple of years

...and the above involves some rather generous payments.
 
2012-05-08 10:05:57 PM
i291.photobucket.com

You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?
 
M-G
2012-05-08 10:06:15 PM
That guy needs an, uh, interesting Wikipedia page created. Then he can tell us how accurate it is...
 
2012-05-08 10:06:18 PM

GAT_00: I like how people get angry when I have the nerve to ask what the money would actually be spent on.


I like how you ask questions for which you can easily find the answer. You sound like Sean Hannity here, "I'm just asking questions, folks."

The $180k is For. A. Web. Site. That is all. No improvements to the trail, no dedicated server, no dedicated webmaster like this is f*cking 1996.

I've seen you in a lot of threads, and really, you've never sounded more retarded.
 
2012-05-08 10:06:58 PM

burning_bridge: Some of you may find this hard to believe but it wasn't likely that they'd spend the whole amount to do it. Its not like some check was wrote out and handed to someone or something, that was just the amount they budgeted for it. Whatever doesn't get spent is kept in the general fund or whatever fund it was earmarked from.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *breathe* AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh man, sorry. So let me get this straight.....You think they give it back instead of just racking up cost until they've spent it all? You really think that? You're cute, here have a pat on the head. Also, my wife, who works in the accounting area for our state office that handles federal grant money, would like me to pass this along to you:

"AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH A HAHAHA"
 
2012-05-08 10:09:23 PM
An entire thread of white knighters for the imaginary $180k website? This is some epic basement dweller shiate right here. Uploading...
 
2012-05-08 10:09:31 PM
TFA is like a little ad for Godaddy.
 
Displayed 50 of 168 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report