links for 2010-09-02
-
Another San Francisco Value: Protecting the environment.
This is the personal site of Derek Powazek. Deal with it.
The people behind proposition 8 put out a new ad last week for some reason. In addition to the usual manipulations and outright lies they’ve employed throughout their campaign, ably deconstructed by Stop8.org, this ad was bookended by the phrase “San Francisco values” replete with scary music.
I’ve lived in San Francisco for 15 years, which is 15 years more than anyone connected to this ad. San Francisco changed my life. I found a career here. I was married here. I bought property here. I’m never, ever leaving. So I think I can speak to what San Francisco Values really are. Here are a few of them.
San Francisco is far from perfect. We have a homelessness problem that is shameful. The city government has historically been full of graft, cronyism, and weirdness. San Francisco was home to both Harvey Milk, California’s first openly gay elected official, and Dan White, who shot Milk dead after only 11 months on the job and then blamed it on Twinkies.
But I’m sad when San Francisco becomes political code for dangerous America-hating baddies. I believe San Franciscans embody the best American values: bravery, liberty, tolerance, and opportunity. I look around San Francisco and I see people who risked everything to move to a place where they could be free. People who decided, out a mix of idealism and insanity, that they could make a more perfect union that values life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
San Francisco values and American values are one and the same.
“It takes no compromising to give people their rights. It takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no survey to remove repressions.” – Harvey Milk, 1973
I grew up in a small town somewhere in the sprawling mess of spaghetti freeways that form Southern California. To be a person in Los Angeles is to have a car. And sometimes, having a car means becoming a driver.
A driver is not just the operator of a car. A driver is someone who knows the pulse of the roads. Someone who can navigate rush hour. Someone who can tell if the car in front is really going to turn, or just forgot their blinker was on. Someone who knows the silhouette of a speed trap from a mile away.
It doesn’t matter what you drive – my first car was a VW Bug that was born before me – it matters how you drive and how driving fits into your life.
Skip forward 20 years or so and now I’m a San Franciscan. I’ve been a Muni commuter, a walker, a biker, and a carpooler, but after all these years, I’m still a driver. You can take the boy out of Southern California, but you can’t take the LA out of the boy.
Make no mistake, cars are filthy, Earth-killing, city-ruining monsters. Cars can turn the sweetest mom into a rage-filled, bird-flipping, Tourette’s syndrome demonstration. They’re bad for cities, bad for people, and bad for the planet. I know all this. But being a driver is just about my last vice. I gave up smoking (something that always went well with driving). I got married. I settled down. Leave me this one bad habit.
San Francisco is not a car culture like LA. There are almost no freeways within the city limits, and most businesses don’t even have parking lots. And to most public transit commuters or bike lane denizens, if you’re in a car, you’re pretty much the enemy.
But I don’t think it has to be that way. You can be a driver in San Francisco without being a dick. Here are my personal rules for how to be a driver in San Francisco. I share them with you in the hopes that, if you, like me, truly love driving and love San Francisco, we can make them both a little better.
San Francisco is a small place. It’s not like LA, where you can flip someone off in traffic and know that you’ll never see them again. Here you will see them again. And we San Franciscans, we remember.
So, please, for all of us who want to be Drivers and San Franciscans, drive like everyone around you knows your cellphone number. Pretend they’re all friends of your mother. You don’t want it getting around that you gave that nice old lady the finger on Highway 1 just because she slowed down to see if that deer was hurt, do you?
Happy driving.
Since the first one went so well, I decided to up the ante. Last weekend I attached six Woolly Pockets to my office wall and filled them with two dozen plants to make a vertical tropical garden. The installation was a breeze and, so far, all the plants are still happy. I love it.
If you’re thinking about doing the same, here are a few tips based on my experience.
So far, I’m absolutely loving my new vertical garden and can’t wait to see how it evolves.
Twitter is currently testing a new feature called “Who to follow” (henceforth referred by its unfortunate acronym, WTF). When I log in there’s a box on the main page that suggests two users for me to follow. If this sounds familiar, that’s because it’s exactly what Facebook does.
The purpose of a test like this is to gather feedback, so here’s some feedback. (The usual caveats apply: I don’t work at Twitter, I don’t know the specifics of their technology or the requirements for this project, and I may be grumpy from the cold I’ve had all week.)
I hate it. It’s poorly named, poorly placed, and poorly implemented.
“Who to follow” is a command. It’s like saying “Do This Now.” People don’t like suggestions phrased as commands. So why not call it something like: “Suggested Twitterers” or “You Might Like”?
It’s important to understand the emotions you’re triggering in the user. Human brains have evolved to recognize and react to faces. Showing the faces of people you know, along with command language, can create dissonance. It’s as if the person is giving you the command. That’s one of the reasons people are reacting so strongly.
The location of information on a page offers insight into the company’s priorities. In this case, WTF appears on the right side of the page, above the main Twitter navigation (@replies, Direct Messages, Favorites, Retweets, and Search). This location implies that WTF is more important than the rest of those things. I disagree. It should be below the main navigation, with the rest of the optional items (Saved Searches, Lists, Trending, and Following).
Speaking of those optional items, all of them can be toggled into a closed/minimized state that shows only the title of the section and not the content. But WTF does not get this toggle. Why? Adding the toggle would provide a pressure-release valve for members like me who don’t like it, while still making it available for those who do. Twitter’s designers clearly know this – a toggle is available for every other sidebar item outside of the main navigation – so the fact that it’s not implemented for WTF is perplexing.
The only rationale for its placement, as far as I can tell, is that the top right corner is where it’s implemented on Facebook. But that’s not a good reason.
WTF routinely recommends people I’ve blocked, and as you know, I block liberally. It also suggests people I’d followed for a while and consciously decided to stop following (sometimes you can like a person and not like their tweets). So suggesting these people is unhelpful at best, aggravating at worst.
Finally, it’s aimed at the wrong audience. I can see how a feature like this would be very helpful to new members, but I am not a new member. My first public tweet was four years ago (my account was private before that). Twitter knows this about me. A more elegant interface would be active in making suggestions to new users, but more passive with active users like me, who’ve shown they already know how to find and follow people.
All in all, Twitter’s WTF is a great case study on why a feature that works well on Facebook cannot simply be copied and placed into another social context. Facebook is all about fastidious friend list maintenance – that’s the basic element there. Twitter is about … something else. The relationships are part of it, sure, but there’s more afoot. That’s why I like it.
Just to be clear, I’m not arguing against the existence of the feature, I’m just critiquing its implementation. Having a steady stream of new inputs is how community systems avoid groupthink. So the system should encourage users to follow more/different people. It should just be done as an optional suggestion, with more smarts behind it, in a place that’s equivalent to its value to the user. In other words, it should be designed to feel like Twitter. As it stands now, it feels like a piece of Facebook, grafted on to Twitter.
I should also say, I feel for the Twitter design team. They’re tinkering with a speeding train with a billion passengers that’s laying track as it goes. And all the passengers have bullhorns. It’s a tough gig and I want to see them succeed. I hope this post is taken as just a little piece of feedback from a longterm member with a pounding headache.