Theodicius
Good. Evil. Bratwurst.

The new machine has been purchased. Since I’m a bit anal about starting fresh with each new computer, it’ll take me a couple of days to have it up and functional.

If you’re curious, the “starting fresh” bit is more than simple habit, it actually accomplishes two very useful things for me:

• It makes sure I don’t bring anything dirty (corrupted data, bad files, etc.) or unnecessary into the new system.
• It gives me a chance to exercise the new system, and get used to anything quirky about it.

Yes, it moos.

I know, I’m supposed to do this in the dark, then spring it on everyone as a brand new birth, but that just didn’t seem right.

I mean we all are in need of the occasional redesign, aren’t we? And we can’t hide ourselves away until our metamorphosis is complete, can we?

All of us go through our days, slowing making changes to this or that part of ourselves, growing, changing, living. Why should my blog be any different? Isn’t it more honest to keep the process open, expose the flaws and fix them, while you watch?

Starting out with a minor bit of coding and a liberal application of Photoshop to a Great Master, I’ve plopped the mess in front of you, to watch it slouch its way into existence. Together we’ll explore the good, bad and ugly of this. What works and what doesn’t?

The software is updated.

Step 2 will be a new template while I sit back and watch what happens.

Rands is usually good for something interesting, but this time he’s really on to something. In today’s world design is a part of development, and development is a part of design. You can’t effectively do one without knowing something about the other. If you’re a one-person shop, you have to do both at the same time.

Some pull quotes:

“Designers have two choices. Either dip their feet into the programming pool and learn this frontier technology, or figure out how to speak developer.”

“…they must be passionate about something other than writing fast, bug-free code because software is art.”
(more…)

Some naive folks from Utah invited me to join their concom recently. They were bidding on the World Horror Convention.

We got the bid! Have patience. It’s a new site and we just got the bid for 2008, so there’s a lot of decisions that are just now being made. I’d tip you off to them here, but Robert Bloch promises me he’ll stop haunting me if I do, so you’ll just have to be patient. Just expect to come and have fun.

Wow. Me on a concom. Now that’s horror.

So how do we get him out? (Apologies to the shade of Douglas Adams.)

Since making my “Professional?” comment, the daily spam level here has gone up 500%. No, I’m not making an accusation, simply stating a fact. There are several reasons for it, I just find it interesting when the flow current around me changes.

It did succeed in stirring me out of my lethargy, however. Changes Will Occur.

I suppose I should mention something about the Da Vinci Code, as everyone else seems to be getting drawn in, so here I go.

It’s a well-written thriller, in general, but the historical research is amazingly shoddy. As fiction, I’d give it a B, but if he submitted the “research” behind it as a term paper, it’d get an “F” at most, and we might even have to invent a lower grade for it. He begins with a page stating “facts”, virtually none of which is actually true in the strictest sense, though a few items you could “spin” into being acceptably true, in the sense that claims made in TV commercials are “true.”

You see, I’ve been down this “historical” road a few decades ago, when I read “Holy Blood, Holy Grail”, but it seems Dan Brown lacks the critical skills required to be a researcher or historian. He seems to believe everything he reads (’it’s in a book, therefore it must be true”) which is a fatal flaw when doing research, though quite essential, if only in a temporary sense, when reading fiction.
(more…)

Spam levels shooting up, nearing 1000/day, now. The walls are holding, but I should thank the little bugger, I suppose. It’s makiing it more worth my time to automate the defenses against his crap.

OK, I’ll amend the spam numbers. I’ve just recieved nearly 200 insurance spams in the last half-hour. If the site goes down for a while, it’s because the server couldn’t take the load. He appears to have it set on auto-fire.

I could suspect it’s malicious, but I’d prefer to think it was just stupidity.

Must be a definition of the term with which I’m unfamiliar…

Nutshell: Blogger hires a designer. Designer creates new design. Blogger installs design, lauds designer. Designer Two does a “remix” and sends to blogger. Blogger likes some facets, announces he will “steal” them. Designer One announces on her blog she is resigning over this. She is lauded in the comments for her class and professionalism. Blogger finds out designer is resigning by reading her blog.

I’m not going to hold up anyone’s behavior here as exemplary, but I really have to take issue with the “class and professionalism” comments. Since when is it either classy or professional to resign without directly facing the person (even via email) and telling them? Since when is it either classy or professional to play to the gallery and not the client? OK, so she was offended and resigned over it. Everyone has their own tolerance thresholds, I’m certainly not going to criticise her for hers. But to be professional about it would require talking to the client first (AFAICT, she didn’t talk to the client directly about this at all) and to be classy would be to quietly walk away, without publicly pointing fingers. Everyone who mattered would know why, anyway, and the story could be filed away and told later (anonymized) as a “case study in how to lose a designer.”

Was the resignation justified? That’s her call and I won’t second-guess her on it. But classy and professional? Get real.

OK, so I shouldn’t open my mouth about this without saying what I’d do and giving you a chance to tell me how wrong I am. So here’s my behavior (I will, for the purposes of the examples, assume my tolerance thresholds are about where it seems those of the actual players in this drama are):

as Blogger (Privately to designer one): Can we revisit a couple of items in the design? I’ve seen some ideas I think are pretty good and I’d like to talk to you about how easy it might be to implement some of them.

as Designer One (privately to Blogger): I think that public post you made about the new design was unfair to me. I thought I was giving you what you wanted; until that post you hadn’t said a word to me about things you didn’t like. If you had a problem with it or with me, you should have told me and we could have fixed it. Now you’re publicly slamming me over a design you already approved. Since you like that other design so much, you should hire that designer. I’ll resign and let you get on with hiring him.

as Designer Two: I’d keep my mouth shut. When I was young and naive, I thought doing remixes on spec was a good way to find new clients. Problem is, most of the time the client approved, and sometimes even mandated, the design that I was “improving.” The unrequested remix steps on so many toes that it almost never ends up happily. I don’t do that anymore, except as a private exercise for my own gratification or as a learning experience, and even then I never “cold call” the original’s owner with it.

Note in all cases, I don’t go public. Going public is the worst thing a professional can do. Now everyone sees your behavior, and no matter how you handle it, some will be offended, and you will have lost potential clients. The Blogger loses potential designers, because they don’t want to be treated like Designer One was treated. Designer One loses clients, because they don’t know what other hot buttons they might inadvertantly step on, and don’t want to risk being treated like the Blogger was if they accidentally step on one. And Designer Two loses out because some potential clients and associates now see him as a backstabber. No one gains from such a public display, because anyone who likes what they saw was already a potential client/associate.

A couple of people have asked me why I’ve got the comments moderated, because moderation slows down the discussion, and discourages active commentary. Main reason is laziness. I’ve been too lazy to upgrade to better spam protection on this blog, so I simply locked the door to keep the spammers out (averaging 50/day at the moment, the last batch being more insurance than anything else; seems like I get 1-2 spam subjects per day, but they try to spam every single post).

Yes, it detracts from the instantaneous commentary, but could it be that this is, in itself, overrated? It lets the heat of the moment pass, and I’ve noticed the commentary I have received is far more civil than is the norm for Inet commentary. Could the time delay be a partial cause of that, or are you simply better behaved than most of the Inet crowd?

This bit from Bob Sutton opened my eyes this morning:

“Fight as if you are right; listen as if you are wrong.”

Wow. And if that isn’t good enough to wake you up this morning, try:

“Find people who disagree with you. If you get mad at them, it’s good sign you need to think.”

I think I’ve found me a new guru. (Quotes from Guy Kawasaki’s “Signal Without Noise” blog.

At my father-in-law’s for his 90th birthday bash, but with my left hand rendered inoperable by my table saw and my right side impaired by a strained neck muscle, I got to feeling mighty useless. And that, in turn got me thinking in general about the question of the value of a man.

I’m not sure when it started, but here in the US we’ve fallen hook, line and sinker for the old utilitarian definition of value. Your worth is what you do. A person’s value is directly related to what they do and have done.

Don’t believe me? Try this sinmple test: Ask anyone what they do (ask yourself, even). It’s nearly certain the response will be phrased “I *am* a(n) blank” with the blank replaced by the name of an occupation. In other words, they are defining themselves by their occupation. (more…)

The fact spammers are so clueless makes keeping them at bay so much easier than it could be. The latest rush informed me that my site was so cognitive that I was going to have a great future.

Thanks, guys. And I hope you have one, too. The secret is to bang the rocks together.

Oh, and my name’s not Jane.