For someone who says "it doesn’t matter one fucking iota who is behind the authoring of this article" this article spends a whoooole lot of time and energy talking about... him.
The number of "I ..." sentences is incredible. Talk about the subject then. You are making these articles about yourself and your opinions in the way you write them.
I don't disagree with the original article but this is... ahh.
Just to put that quote back into the context it was taken out of (emphasis added for clarification):
Part of me really wants to say: it doesn’t matter one fucking iota who is behind the authoring of this article. It’s the content, the debate, that matters, not me. I’m not here to sell anything, I’m not even here to push ad units or try to achieve personal fame (in all honesty, the thought of having published this article anonymously is somewhat appealing to me). However, I can also understand wanting to understand where the article is coming from, and there will always be those who demand that we “show and prove”.
The author's problem is that he hangs around with the wrong kind of people if 90% of all designers he comes across are douchebags. He's either a poor judge of character, or a douchebag himself (attracting other douchebags).
Precisely. It sounds like the author is caught in his own toxic filter bubble, and because he is unhappy with his surroundings he things the entire sphere of design culture is a cesspool. He's dead wrong.
It makes me sad that so many would be offended by an article designed to spark meaningful debate.
I'm not offended, I just don't think his article(s) sparks meaningful debate. The premise of the first one was that 90% of all designers are assholes, the second one was defensive and a repeat of the first one but in a different tone.
The defensive nature of the second one (the one in the OP) makes it less of a debate and more of a confrontation.
gotta love these "i got a lot of traffic by being crude and contrary" subtle brag posts.
It's no longer enough to write medium articles telling everyone that they are doing it wrong. You have to call them assholes too.
'like duh, it's called attention seeking, a crazy concept I know'
yawnnnn, does anyone not talk industry anymore?
I like this guy.
So design is this one field where everyone in it must be altruistic n% of the time, otherwise you're contributing to destroying the field? I don't know, that sounds like some arbitrary rule this guy pulled from thin air.
It is up to you to decide what “worthwhile” is defined as, and what sort of (if any) meaning you want to inject into the world.
He, for the most part, isn't saying anything. The original article didn't say anything either. It was another 'X is broken but I won't tell you how, or what to do about it' post.
Personally, I like working at an agency and solving client problems. In my free time I like learning new things and talking to people about them. I'm not actively contributing to the betterment of society (at least by his standards), and that's fine right now.
I'm so glad I didn't comment on that original article :D
Top comment is attacking the person without contributing anything to the debate/argument/idea/whatever itself...
Might as well be reddit.
My two cents:
The core purpose of design is to communicate. And in that sense all design contributes to humanity in some form, and is generally beneficial (in some way) to many of those that use the design. Who are we to dictate what benefits humanity? A smile is a benefit is it not?
Humanity is the judge of how good a design is, and how well it works. We can all talk amongst ourselves as much as we'd like, but it's the non-design community that truly dictates what ends up being a successful design. If a startup, company, app, etc is well received, and grows then something was designed correctly.
So if that "****hole" of design (as referenced) ends up creating a startup that is successful...well great work by all those involved. And while I'm sure things weren't perfect, and maybe followed along with certain trends...well something was done right. And it's likely because of good design.
I love the comments on DN. It's interesting to see who gets offended by articles like these. "Methinks the man doth protest too much" ?