Public Voice Network
- Smartisan OS 1515
- how its made? 44
- ios7 143143
- Logo's like this? 1111
- Video Games... 987987
- Similar Font? 44
- Pic of the Day 7538375383
- Palms (Isis/Deftones) alb… 55
- QBNTPhE 2013 104104
- new MEC logo 1616
- What are you listening to… 56405640
- Vid of the Day 1529015290
- NBA Finals 2013 2626
- o_O 1919
- blog 5784957849
- The Returned 1414
- Superman: Man of Steel 6666
- Mid-Sr Level Designer NYC 55
- above the fold - website … 99
- the gif animation thread 1879118791
- ganja thread 2.0 525525
- Crack Your Back 1010
- Spoonerism of the day 3535
- News of the day... 710710
Blah Blah design blahblah 2727 Responses
Last post: 1 year, 2 months ago | Thread started: Apr 3, 12, 7:01 a.m.
- cannonball1978
Is it a bad sign when I look at things on here about design and just sort of zone out? Don't get me wrong, beautiful design grips me by the balls. I just glaze over when I read the word "design".
See good design - AWESOME
Read the word "Design" - Make farting noise with mouth.
I think it's a pavlovian thing for me now, reading that word.
- Apr 3, 12, 7:01 a.m. – Permalink
- cannonball1978
We should call it zoombang.
Did you see that new zoombang? Siiick.
Bill, get those zoom bangs over to the client pronto.
Etc.

- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 7:15 a.m. – Permalink
- ian00
Given how little agency we have in the world, why would we want to give up the core definition of our discipline? Others are envious of it – MBAs "design" business plans, system engineers "design" processes – but if we surrender, the very notion of design will get watered down beyond recognition. Autonomy über alles!


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 7:26 a.m. – Permalink
- cannonball1978
Ah I see you want intelligent discourse. Well, it's already an overly watered down and generalized word, yet people still see it as some intellectual land grab ever since the business world started (sort of) recognizing it's applied value. This has cranked the volume of design shit talking to 11, since, well, designers need to sound like the be-all-end-all authority on design and design thinking.
Sorry... zoom bang thinking. Who cares about what agency we have. Those that can do, do, and those who can't twiddle their thumbs.


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 7:33 a.m. – Permalink
- ian00
@ cannonball1978. I agree wholeheartedly that the discipline is already watered down and that design shit talking is laughably out of control. All the more reason to draw clear boundaries around our own version of it rather than redefine it. Perhaps I am overly idealistic, but I care about our agency. It seems to me that whatever you do, whether you are conscious of it or not, has an impact. So why not own it? Why not understand the potential and the limits of our own particular area of expertise both in production and criticism?


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 7:45 a.m. – Permalink
- monospaced
ghetto snack


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 8:26 a.m. – Permalink
- futuremongolian
I've been a professional designer since I was 8 years old, and yes, the rhetoric has decline somewhat over the past decade. I blame teh blogs.

- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 8:45 a.m. – Permalink
- ian00
While I sympathize with the ball gripping capacity of good design, it unfortunately does not offer an instrumental set of criteria through which to evaluate one's own work (not to mention teaching or criticism). Justice Potter Stewart's "I know it when I see it" defense would have us all shooting at shifting, invisible targets. Defining our disciplinary boundaries might give us the efficacy to projectively shape out future as opposed to simply reacting to the whims of the market.


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 10:40 a.m. – Permalink
- canoe
I think that there are plenty of boundaries, and ways to measure design. Real designers don't have a problem with that...
I'd rather see your "rules" be applied to the hacks that take jobs for half a professional rate. Put your money where your mouth is ian00 and lobby for a some kind of professional standards examination that focuses just as much on history and theory as it does execution.


- Dog-earApr 3, 12, 12:49 p.m. – Permalink






