Dave Pollard's environmental philosophy, creative works, business papers and essays.

trust your instincts

< £ Salon Bloggers & >

	May 22, 2003

RELATIONSHIPS & COMPROMISE The latest infectious meme in the blogosphere, which suggests that perhaps the best relationships require no compromise at all, started when one blogger innocently observed that a prime example of how compromise works in marriage is the process of deciding "which movie shall we see". Before you go see what others have to say on this subject, think about where you stand on this spectrum: The best relationships require and achieve compromise on all things, big and small. The best relationships let you compromise on small unimportant things, but quickly achieve shared consensus on things that matter. Compromise depends on the nature of the relationship. In a romantic relationship compromise is necessary, but in friendships it isn't. The best relationships require honesty, and too much compromise is dishonest and leads to chronic unhappiness in the relationship. Generally, women know where to draw the line better than men, and end a relationship that compromises too much. The best relationships require no compromise at all. Life is too short and precious to sacrifice what you really want for one relationship. Decided where you stand? Now how about business relationships -- is your position different? OK, now you can start with Caterina 's post and follow the thread. I'm going to shut up for a change and listen to what others have to say before I add my two cents. AN ASIDE ON SIDELINKS BARS Caterina has also started a "sidelinks" bar, a list of links to interesting issues or subjects , with no or minimal commentary. I think it's a worthwhile idea, but I can't help thinking that if we agreed upon some principles for these, they'd be more useful and we could even get blogmakers to build them into the tools. Take a look at Caterina's (see link above) and those of two 'A-list' bloggers she refers to that I haven't mentioned before: Anil Dash and Jason Kottke . What do you think? What should they be called? Should they have no commentary or a teaser? What's the ideal number? Look for mine, in the right column that has more room, shortly. I'm thinking of calling it incubating memes. 1:38:15 PM  trackback []  comment []

FIVE RADICAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Redesign is the fourth 'R' -- after reduce, reuse, recycle -- that could make the world saner, more sustainable and more livable. But most design is unremarkable: Pretentious, imitative, retrospective, incremental. Here are five radical design principles, gleaned from thinking about how few of the over-hyped design mega-award-winners are purple cows : Design should be intelligent, not informative. It should do things for you, not give you more data to do things for yourself. How could we design an in-car navigation system to do this? (my own idea) Design should obviously and intuitively simulate real life, not force people to adapt to new technology. It should need no manual. How could we design meeting technology, or technology for long-distance family videoconferences, to do this? (idea from Alias|Wavefront ) Design should recognize that we are nomads by nature, and be so portable we take it everywhere without even thinking about it. Anything else ties us down: to desks, offices, cities, civilization, routines, old ideas, boring places, the tyranny of possessions. How could we design kitchens, or clothes, to do this? (my own idea) Design should start with a small piece of wood and shadowing someone under thirty. Tell him or her it's a magic block and can be designed to do anything. Write down what he or she wishes it could do. Then start designing. (idea from Marc Rettig ) Design should make you feel better. Our terrible world is making us all crazy. Most of us can't or won't be involved in fixing it. So design stuff that comforts, exhilarates, stimulates, takes people away. Think safe recreational drugs, more effective women's vibrators, VR tours of exotic places. (my own idea) 9:10:38 AM  trackback []  comment []

© Copyright 2004 Dave Pollard. Last update: 19/02/2004; 2:44:29 PM.