|
WebWord Weblog Posting Posting Date: September 16, 2002 WebWord Posting 836, Redux -- "Timo Arnall is a very well-respected designer, one with both impeccable taste and a greater-than-usual feel for usability issues. He also happens to be a personal friend. I have a very hard time believing that Timo would post inarticulate and anonymous pissings, when he is more than able to defend his decisions with precision and elegance. "Further, I think it's worth pointing out that this entire tempest in a teacup is taking place on a site whose lime-green accents and black on blaring white give *me* a headache, and offend my aesthetic sense. It may in some sense constitute a narrowly-defined "usability," but I would never "use" it. Same goes for Uncle Jakob's monstrosity of a site, which I find barely navigable. "Designers are employed for many reasons; one of them is that usability engineers are frequently enough incapable of applying aesthetic judgment to their underlying structural decisions. Timo not merely gets this stuff, but he gets most of it right for this user, most of the time. Which is more than I can say for others participating in this travesty of a discussion."
Reader Comments...
Adam Greenfield writes: "...this entire tempest in a teacup is taking place on a site whose lime-green accents and black on blaring white give *me* a headache, and offend my aesthetic sense." No one likes the lime green. I don't even like it. I have never liked it. But, in some strange way, that is why I like it so much. I try to challenge how I feel when I can. It keeps my head clear. It also helps me focus on things that count. Like content. And community. And getting people to post excellent comments. Adam, two thumbs up to an excellent post. You are being bold and I like that. (Jack, I like your comment too. If you weren't so damn offensive, Adam wouldn't be so pissed off. And, despite what some folks might think, this is the kind of discussion that I think it interesting and useful. Sure, it borders on a flame war, but that makes it spicy and hot.) Everyone, repeat after me. I must remain clam, I must remain clam, I must remain clam. And I must remain shrimp. And lobster. And crab legs. With butter. Yum! And remember kids: "No single web site owns my ass, except for maybe WebWord." Posted by: John S. Rhodes on September 16, 2002 09:19 PM
Mick wrote: "First Rule of I missed this comment until just a couple of minutes ago. I thought it was a relatively humorous way to defuse what I will call...a sandlot flame war. My .sig for today -- "No single web site owns my ass, except for maybe WebWord."
John, you clipped out Adam's claim that I'm a troll. If arguing on the issues means trollery, then I am a big fat ugly green troll. Look past my attitude and deal with the ideas. I was deeply offended by Timo -- not because of his fine language, but his attitude toward disabilities. His telling me my disability is a preference is flamebait trolling as far as I'm concerned. Deeply offensive. If he was in the room when he said it, I'd have smacked him. I believe dyslexia is pervasive in *mild*, undocumented forms (e.g., only severe cases are identified, many people are affected in mild ways and never realize it). Contrast is an issue. Poor contrast web sites that induce eye strain, headaches, or make reading difficult are not a preference issue. We're talking about a small percentage of sites with this problem because of the path the designers chose, not a widespread problem that users should adapt to. It is rather simple to design with contrast in mind. If that's difficult, then I guess it means designing smarter. It's not like me saying, "I like yellow more than white, therefore I'll default my page backgrounds to yellow." It's me saying, "I cannot read that page. If I continue trying, I'll be buying stock in Tylenol. Do you want me to reconfigure my browser so that I can read this one site and distort 98% of the other web sites in the world to my detriment?" And it's certainly not as if it's strictly an accessibility issue - it's an issue for everyone. I stopped reading the thread because it's a dead horse. I will not change attitudes. Feet are dug in. BTW John, thanks for calling me offensive. It ranks right up there with the time I pissed off Wil Wheaton. I appreciate direct commentary, unlike the cowardly kiddie comments someone was posting in the dead thread. (I took Wil to task for locked font sizes and launching user discussions in new windows.)
Jack, let me understand something here: do you have any work of your own to show, or do you while away your days taking other people to task for the work they are at least brave enough to share with the world? The flip side of accountability is respect, and acknowledgment that none of what we in the broader UX field are attempting to do is simple, straightforward and linear. There will be different audiences, different approaches, differening usabilities. I can't imagine it's helpful to pretend otherwise. Posted by: Adam Greenfield on September 16, 2002 10:28 PM
Adam, let me get this straight. My ideas cannot be credible unless you can review web sites I've designed. Interesting. I've made no claims that my designs are superior to Timo's. That's never been an issue. It's not even really about Timo's specific designs. It's about contrast, readability and disabilities. I won't allow you to make comparison work an issue. It's in this same vein that I've seen pathetic attacks on Jakob Nielsen because his site is ugly -- as if that has anything to do with anything. All straw man arguments. I won't be reading this thread further. It's as futile as the original 'discussion.' Regular WebWorders know that Jack is not my real name, and that I've never cited my own work. If you cannot discuss on the issues and debate ideas, I have nothing more to say to you. Posted by: Jack on September 16, 2002 10:40 PM
Great, funk out when you're called on your overweening arrogance. You seem to have no problem with sniping anonymously from the sidelines as others put their reputations and their work on the line. If that works for you, that's fine. Doesn't seem that you were particularly interested in a "discussion" to begin with, anyway - which is precisely what gives usability a bad name in the broader design community. Where is there any acknowedgment in any of what you've written that the site under discussion is a personal expression? Where is there any attempt on your part to determine what audience that site might be interested in reaching, or in what way the composition of that audience might influence the designer? I try to stick to this humble but hard-won piece of wisdom where usability issues are concerned: "Remember: You are not the user." None of these issues - contrast, color, text sizing, link strategy - occur in a vacuum, and unless you're going to account for the site's actual audience rather than inserting yourself and your prejudices into a blank box labeled USER, you're not IMO doing usability. Posted by: AG on September 16, 2002 11:12 PM
Dangit - I think I just posted to the "Dead Thread" - is that like a "Dead Spool"? I've heard of a Dead Pool, but not a Dead Spool...(get it? thread/spool) ...Jack -- when you claimed that you "get headaches" -- I (and I would guess others) assumed you were slightly exagerating. If your dyslexia is creating this problem, then maybe you should CONSIDER a user style sheet. I don't expect people to design everything in big text if my eyes are poor - rather I get glasses. Recognize that your disability (and we all have some) puts you in a minority. Sites are not, and can not, and will not ever be designed to meet the needs of all audiences and all minorities, period. Now it's true that the needs of some minorities can be met with simple fixes, and in your case maybe black text on white background would do the trick. Are you REALLY saying that EVERY site on the web should change its design to meet your unique needs? What if there is someone who gets headaches if there's too much contrast or too much white on screen? - whose needs are more important? - who do we design for? I'm trying to be practical here. Posted by: Lyle - Usability Guru on September 16, 2002 11:54 PM
Jack wrote: "John, you clipped out Adam's claim that I'm a troll." Sorry about about that. How about this: Adam thinks you're a troll. Feel better? ;-) Jack wrote: "BTW John, thanks for calling me offensive." No problem! Thanks for saying thanks. For the record, one very important point I want to make is that I don't think "offensive" is bad, or wrong, or inappropriate. In fact, I like offensive things. (Proof? Just look at the nasty lime-green that is used all over WebWord.) Offensive things, and offensive people, force thinking. I appreciate that. Posted by: John S. Rhodes on September 16, 2002 11:57 PM
John, I think you offended that lime-green color. I just noticed it turned bright red at the edges, although I'm not sure if it was embarassed due to the unusual amount of attention or just plain pissed that you called it "nasty" and "offensive." For the record, I like the lime green -- reminds me of the Hulk, the Riddler, limeade, cash, spring and Irish Spring -- these reminders all strengthen the Webword brand as a strong, funny (yet intellectually challenging), refreshing, growing, mostly clean community. (Okay, I'm not sure how cash factors into the equation. Maybe when John's latest biz plan kicks in that'll be more evident. :-) ...hold on, my monitor's flaking out.
Lyle, I do indeed have a business plan and I am building a web site to support it. I've mostly been running this project under the radar. Folks will start hearing more and more about the site in the next few weeks. It will definitely be something that some people will appreciate. I've been holding back on my enthusiasm. It will be nice to unleash the idea when the time is right. Aside: Did a quick search for the Hulk over at Google Images. I found this image which totally makes me think of the Hulk combined with Ozzy Osbourne. Ha!
John, I love the green. It gives me a real sense of place. As soon as I saw the Hulk trailer I thought of Webword. When this film comes out you're going to see hulk green everywhere. You should start calling it hulk green instead of lime green and get ahead of the pack. Anyhoo, back to the debate: I often use this argument at work "I'm going to do it the way I think it should be done, and if you don't like it you can get someone else to do it, because there is no way I am implementing your XXX XXX" But it is important to note that in these work 'negotiations', I am usually arguing with Incompetent Managers who are worried about how they look in the company or marketing pukes with double barelled names fresh out of university. When I am talking to my users (the people on the end of the phone in the call centre, or the staff in the branches who are trying to cover the lunchtime rush with three people of sick with stress) I never have to make such silly statements, because we usually share the same goals and we can have reasonable discussion about the 'how'. One of the things that really annoys me about some 'usability' is the arrogant dismissive way in which it treats the users. On this issue I come down on the side of the user (Jack in this case). I might have phrased my concerns in different language, but I respect Jack for honestly saying what he thinks. Most people seem to live by the rule If you haven't got anyhthing nice to say then don't say anything. If we all kept quiet then PR would rule the world. I spent an hour at the weekend looking at Timo's Photographic Diary. Despite the fact that I couldn't read any of the text on the page I was enthralled by the images and the stories they told. If you look at the LIFT site referenced on elastic space you can see clear black text on a white backgound (although I can't resize the text). I would class elasticspace as a highly personal site, and when you criticise someone's personal taste (I quite like my brown tank-top and flared shorts) it's likely that you'll get a personal emotive response. I would like to finish my contribution with a couple of quotes from elasticspace about usability: It is vitally important to listen to your audience - simple usability testing is easy and Creating an experience of frustration should be deliberate
Agree with "you are not the user" - Test, test, test and iterate back into the design as quickly as time allows. Posted by: daniel szuc on September 17, 2002 08:34 AM
Going back to the original point about font sizes / colours / background colours, it is obvious that some people would have difficulty reading the pages. I had difficulty reading the links on the photography page referred to by Mac above (although the photographs were interesting). However, a designer is perfectly entitled to design this way, especially on a personal site, and acknowledge that that might mean some people won't want to use their site. What often surprises me is that some designers don't even seem to be able to make this acknowledgement without inferring that it's the site visitor's fault they're having problems. Posted by: Alan Fisher on September 17, 2002 11:54 AM
Comments in the original posting suggested that site visitors use their own CSS or tweak the browser preferences to provide the view of the page they needed/wanted. I suggest to you that there are a great many people out there who haven't the slightest idea how to do either of those things on the Internet. Think about your relatives, friends acquaintances: How many of them would know what to do when faced with a site they had difficulty viewing (other than exiting the site, that is)? Mine wouldn't--not without calling tech support, anyway. If you want people to read the information you post on your site, don't make them change their settings to do it. I like to read and will read to the end of a good article on the web if I find it interesting.
it is obvious that some people would have difficulty reading the pages I agree with Alan. Denying the problem exists, and/or attacking people who identify such problems doesn't help anyone. Pity that such a simple discussion brought out the worst in some people. Posted by: Ron Zeno on September 17, 2002 03:48 PM
it is obvious that some people would have difficulty reading the pages I agree with Alan. Denying the problem exists, and/or attacking people who identify such problems doesn't help anyone. Pity that such a simple discussion brought out the worst in some people. Posted by: Ron Zeno on September 17, 2002 03:49 PM
Home | Moving WebWord | Cool Books | Hot Web Sites
URL: http://webword.com/weblog/ ©1998-2005 by WebWord.com. All rights reserved. |
