5 ms·
The quoted aphorisms, in my personal experience, aren't used for the reasons being imputed. It feels like forced satire. For example: > "Content is king" - A
by jonahx 8y ago
The quoted aphorisms, in my personal experience, aren't used for the reasons being imputed. It feels like forced satire.
For example:
> "Content is king" - A pretty strong argument to convince everyone to push the deadline because you haven’t received the content that will go on the page you are designing.
I've heard this a lot, but never from a designer trying to push a deadline. It's used to say "stop wasting time dicking around with the design -- the content is what matters" or "it doesn't matter how beautiful it is if no one cares about you're saying."
- dvtrn 8y agoIt feels like forced satire. It could also be good old fashioned regular satire, too...
- mosselman 8y agoCould have been, yet isn’t. The first few were accurate and somewhat funny, but it quickly went downhill. Maybe developers aren’t the audience; we are more factual and concrete whereas designers are usually more driven by emotion. The quotes in the article are not very accurate and seem made up, but the general emotion of “designers be like” is evident. Maybe designers respond to that emotion rather than bother with the accuracy of the anecdotes.
- dvtrn 8y agoyet isn’t. You know better than the person who wrote this list, and directly said it in fact is satirical at the conclusion--or is it just a disagreement of what constitutes satire like a few other posters have expressed? Personally I chuckled and grinned wryly at several moments in the piece, understanding completely where the author was coming from.
- zbentley 7y ago> [developers] are more factual and concrete whereas designers are usually more driven by emotion. I am so tired of this trope. Bad designers are influenced by emotion in unconstructive ways. So are bad engineers. I'm also tired of the "emotion == bad when doing engineering stuff" trope. The ideal for developers or designers (or a whole lot of other fields, probably excluding nuclear-launch executors and munitions testers) isn't some emotionless data/spec-driven automaton: it's a responsible person who operates pragmatically and calculatedly when they have enough information, and whose feelings/emotions are constructive and lead to good outcomes when information is scarce or snap decisions need to be made.
- eckza 8y ago... that’s because the author clearly states, at the bottom of the article, that it’s satire.
- jonahx 8y ago> This is a satire article, where I use humor, irony, and exaggeration to invite reflection. Except good satire uses exaggeration to lampoon things that are (at least partially) true in reality. Whereas for half the examples here my reaction was, "No one has ever said that for that reason."
- dvtrn 8y agoSeems to me if you're expecting subjective, personal and otherwise non-universal experiences to fit and perfectly align with the parameters of an objective definition, the joke is always going to sail a few hundred-thousand feet above sea level, and the satire will always smell of moldy cheese. But that's just my five quid.
- screye 8y agoHate it when people use satire as a means to be passive aggressive or deflect criticism. Good satire is a form of pointed commentary. If you use it to say , "I didn't mean any of what I wrote", then you defeat the purpose of it.