first impressions
older.html: Oh, my. Lemme just be speechless for a moment... Right. Bright blue background, some kind of Mighty Mouse theme going (but that's kewl - I lurrrve Mighty Mouse), some really badly-done title graphics (all splodgy; bad .jpg compression, methinks)... uhm, archives listed in a scrolly div on the upper right, and various other thingies squished in around the rest of it.
entries: Match archives layout. I'm starting with 030525_60.html

general aesthetics
Hideous. Very ten-inch CGA monitor a lá 1989... bright yellow text on bright blue background, in other words. But at least the text is a good size (Verdana at size=3, I suspect, although it might just be using my defaults).
0 points

layout
I suspect that before a bunch of extras were squished in there it looked fairly decent. The extra content should be arranged below the entry. You've got two animated thingies there on the left and they keep drawing my eye away from the text in the scrolly div on the right.
-2.5 points

user-friendliness
Excellent: the scrollbar is my default, visited and unvisited links are actually different colours, the hover cursor is a hand and the hover effect is underline. I do believe you're the first person to get full points in this category. :)
5 points

navigation
Everything is at the bottom of the entry (in the scrolly div). Everything has a good descriptive title. The arrangement of the navigation is quite acceptable, although ideally I'd like everything other than previous and next to be outside of the scrolly div. (Just sayin'.)
0 points

continuity
Almost daily updates and lots of multiples. Very good. :)
5 points

comprehension
Conversational, as in colloquial. As in coherent if you come from the same planet. ;) Oh, okay, not that bad. But very colloquial. Grammar is good one minute, then the next it's rather stream-of-consciousness, the kind of thing one can expect to see in AIM convos - apostrophes missing, inappropriate or no punctuation, assorted capitalisation, etcetera etcetera. It's the inconsistency that grates the most.
0 points

content
I get the feeling she's writing for an established audience, people who are expected to know who's who and why she's referring to whatever. That compounds the conversational thing - she's talking to her peers. And then there's a major webcam entry here, which just confirms my theory. ;) Anyway, once I get over the whole colloquial thing (and the 1989-CGA thing) it's not too bad. She's having fun keeping this diary, and it shows. Still, nothing I would really call "substance".

My eyebrows were all 'rugged and lumberjack' so I tried to pluck them. Ouchies. Not fun. Nope. So me, being cheap (the only thing I inherited from my mother), used hair removal cream. After I used it I read the label to find out that it shouldnt be used near your eyes. I should get a frigging Darwin Award. My eyebrows tingled for about five hours afterwards...
030609_83.html

contact
Email and guestbook, both obvious.
5 points

link back
Yep, on the links page.
5 points

extras
Hit counter and imood in the template. Just what I wanted. ;)
5 points

my comments

The Mighty Mouse thing is adorably retro but please, get someone to do it as a proper design. The graphics' background colour doesn't match your background blue and it looks cheap in a nasty, pathetic way, rather than cheap in a good, punky way, if you know what I mean. Also those text graphics need to be redone as .gif files because they purely suck as .jpg files. Otherwise, what on earth can I say? You're cute and you have fun with your diary, and as long as you don't care what passing diary reviewers think you can just carry on as you are... (in which case, ignore what I said about the graphics).

Archive structure is nonexistent - everything going back to April 7 is on the one page.

scores
Total negative points: -2.5
Total positive points: 25
Number of neutral scores: 4
Final score: 72.5/100