You made a card stand for the Boston Celtics? The Celtics own that logo, selling it is clear trademark infringement. Same is true for most (all?) of the images on the post. Just because a customer provided the image does not mean they own the the trademarks or copyrights
Working with Django for the past 15 years has been a pleasure. Joining the community was a revelation. Serving on the board and as president of the DSF was a privilege. I look forward to 20 more years of code and community.
This is a good take on one of the many areas that companies need to change process in as they grow. Bad communication can hamper and destroy a company just as much as bad hiring, bad vision, bad money management.
I about the process in this write up though. There is communication and there is discussion. The article is framed in a way that suggests top down communication process needed to change so that a larger company could be sure that everyone is on the same page and aware of what they need to be aware of. Both examples then however name check the idea that feedback is expected at the least, welcome at best.
How are we meant to read this paragraph:
> “Marketing says we’re an observability platform, not a tool.” It isn’t enough that our CMO said the words in All Hands. As a representative of Marketing, it’s important to me that our product, documentation, engineers who are speaking at conferences, and customer success people get the language consistent. That means I need to show up at department meetings and talk to people in their perspective. Next Monday I’ll talk to all of Engineering very briefly, and later to the docs team specifically.
It reads as if marketing has made a decision by fiat for the rest of the company to toe the line. No judgement there, that may well be how the company chooses to operate. What then is the need for "talk to people in their perspective"? Is various department perspectives going to change the marketing language, or is it just to placate everyone that they were heard? Why does the perspective taking not happen _before_ the decision as input on if the language should change?
> The impact of Markdown becomes clear if we plot a random sample of content websites. (Disclaimer: the data is made-up, based on my perception of the state of the web)
It makes sense that your perception of the web has driven you to create a new tool and market it with a think piece. But to expand that to suggest you have effectively realized and filled a new vector space in the web is excessive
>That sparse area just beyond the limits of Markdown is of vital importance to the web. These websites are not only a joy to read but also the ones that explore the web's possibilities, embracing the medium and evoking a truly web-native feel.
>Currently, these websites are outliers created by individuals who care deeply about the reader's experience or by companies willing to invest extra effort. We need more of them.
Interesting to me that you have added "focus on this paragraph" coloring to your site. I'm not against that in principle, but you have placed it farther up the page than I prefer to read and scroll. So you care deeply about my experience, have created a whole tool to inhabit an area of web design that you think is undeserved, rationalize it based on feels, and, for me, deliver a poorer experience to show it off.
"The Website Wasteland", as you call it, is a good thing if this is the result of populating it.
I am in the process of interviewing for Engineering Manager/VP/CTO type roles. This will require a new skill set of me beyond the tech lead work that I have been doing. This article neatly sums up a good answer to my internal question of how do I start?