Thursday, July 3, 2008

The Weekly Poll: Tit for Tats

[Survey] Held over for one more week: City Weekly Associate Editor Bill Frost thinks the print feature Nice Tats (photo of a tattoo and a one-sentence explaination) is tired, played out and should be 86ed in favor of a new feature. Managing Editor Jerre Wroble believes readers still enjoy Nice Tats and it should stay. Others wonder, what's the diff between an Associate and Managing Editor, anyway?

Should Nice Tats stay or go?
  1. Stay: My tattoo-removal business is booming these days.
  2. Go: I don't want to see my mom's "Poison Rocks!" tat in there.
  3. Modify: Add a "Cool Head Wound" feature next to it.
  4. Don't care: I only read "I Saw You," anyway.
Leave your answer in a comment below or take the Weekly Poll here.

(Bill Frost)

7 comments:

  1. Leave it, I like the Nice Tats!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Get rid of it. I'm tired of seeing crappy tats every week. It perpetuates the idea that SLC doesn't have any idea what good ink is. Plus I don't care if it is a tribute to your mom.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Until newsprint can do better reproduction,I say dump it. No matter how
    good a tat is, in newsprint it can really
    look like shit. Since you won't be changing technology any time soon I say
    get rid of it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nice tats is a good feature. I suggest two pictures, one of the person so we can see where the tat is and then a close up of the tat itself. So often the tat is out of context and distorts the art.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How about a new feature called "tit for tats?" Random people show their tatoos to dancers at the local trails and if they like them, they show a little skin? I am sure that will help circulation...in so many ways.

    ReplyDelete
  6. i'm a little over the nice tats feature...but i think i'd want to know what would be replacing it before committing either way.

    ReplyDelete
  7. get rid of it.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.