I highly recommend you take a look at some of their studies.

From the “What in God’s green earth made anyone think that was a good idea” department comes the latest Halloween decorations launched by the Pacific Science Center.

If you think like an adult, and act like an adult, you can see beyond the bathroom humor displayed here. Unfortunately for the Pacific Science Center employees, they need to constantly think like children – as children are the majority audience at this valuable Seattle venue.

On another (and much more positive note): My wife Justine* and I went to see the Lucy exhibit a couple weeks ago (Lucy’s Legacy). I was highly impressed, even more-so because I learned a lot!
The majority of the exhibit focuses on Ethiopia itself; the history of this amazing nation, the historical significance (in regards to fossils, and the evolution of our planet). Once you start “digging” (I couldn’t resist the pun) into the importance of Lucy herself, the Science Center’s extensive displays (many of which are interactive) on bone structure, skull capacity (I couldn’t help but respond with “man, our skulls are hogs!” when I learned about the capacity of modern man’s skulls compared to earlier specimens), and evolution really take your breath away.
I was also impressed with the amount of supplemental information you get when you borrow one of the free earpieces (which look like little clubs, by the way. Hopefully, unintentional). The dialog and interviews as part of the audio stream teach you even more about the photos, artifacts, fossils and other items on display.
I was nervous that the Lucy’s Legacy exhibit would be dry (again, apologies for the pun), but I am greatly appreciative of how engaging and exciting the exhibit turned out to be. This is no boring night at the museum, loyal readers. Lucy’s Legacy is a joy and, in my opinion, should be shared by adults and children alike.
Finally, the dialog and discussion my wife shared long after leaving the Science Center was the absolute icing on the cake for me. We spoke for hours, and I continue to discuss the discoveries with coworkers and friends weeks later. Now, if they only could get rid of the spider!

*Full disclosure: It was my choice to add the Lucy’s Legacy comments to this post, not my wife’s (who is a Science Center employee). I don’t feel like this is a “plug” for Lucy; instead I feel like a little balance is in order. Sure, the spider photos are funny – and inappropriate – but even so, the Science Center does great work and if it takes a little butt-joke to get you and your kids to visit (beyond seeing Batman in Imax), then so-be-it.

If you’re interested, there’s an amazing video of the Bonobo – Apes that write – from a recent TED conference. The Bonobo is an interesting specimen, especially in the comparison to Australopithecus (that’s Lucy!). I’m just tickled that I can pronounce Australopithecus (as long as I have it written in front of me).

I dare you to watch this without laughing.

I found many answers I was looking for, some that steered me back and forth to either candidate (these aren’t idiots; they employ very smart campaign staff that help in crafting an exacting message – except for some of the gaffs and miscommunications between campaign staff, reality, and what drops from certain candidates mouths).

Beyond the answers, however, I noticed something that – while it doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with how a person should ultimately vote – really shows the attention to detail that one candidates camp shows over the other.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Web sites of Barack Obama and John McCain: My :30 second review.

1. Barack Obama’s “Splash Page” (or “donate page”):

First thing I noticed, the Barack Obama Web site (overall) has a largely Web 2.0 feel to it (lots of whitespace, and gradients galore). As a 30-something voter that has used the Web for many years, I’m drawn to layouts like this. For a specific demographic, score one for Obama. This layout is clean, without bells and whistles, and for some reason, reminds me of waking up on a farm. Or taking a lot of easy, deep breaths.

Second, the size of the splash screen (the required browser size in order to eliminate any scrollbars) was quite small – different from the main site by some amount. I’m not sure if that’s a good thing or bad, but I’m glad to see that I’m not required to maximize the browser on my laptop in order to get the “meat” of the Web site. For a screen real-estate hog (me), score one for Obama.

2. John McCain’s “Splash Page” (or “disaster on web 1.0′s wheels”):

McCain’s Splash page, before it got resized.

McCain’s splash page – in all it’s enormity.

I gotta say, when I loaded the John McCain splash page without resizing the Barack Obama window (I wanted to test differences in layout) I wasn’t prepared for the massive amount of screen real-estate I’d have to adjust for to eliminate the scrollbars. I mean, c’mon McCain staff – I had to hide the dock on my MacBook Pro just to get the vertical scrollbars to go away – and for what? So I could load the really poorly designed bevelled buttons? Did someone just get gifted a copy of Photoshop 6 and went all ape over the preset “styles” flyout?

Ok, that off my chest, let’s get back to raw comparison of the splash screen. Let’s see, enormous size? Check. Really badly designed buttons? Check. Embedded movies right off the front that scared the crap out of me at 1:53 AM? Check! I haven’t broken out my pica-ruler yet (I keep one by my desk at work), but I could swear the type on McCain’s splash page couldn’t get any tighter without starting sparks.

Finally, to get off the bashing of the McCain splash page, while I personally don’t agree with autoplaying video on a Web site (and certainly not without some kind of warning – a little pee came out, people!), having videon on the splash does help his message (in my opinion – wait, isn’t this ALL in my opinion?). The “ads” that played were more along the lines of “get to know John,” and less about “there’s a terrorist in your midst – don’t elect Dr. Zaius!” I guess score one for a cleaner, more “about me” campaign video.

3. Let’s talk code:

Dreamweaver?? Are you frigging kidding me?!

First off, I’m going to talk about the McCain splash page. I secretly look at the code used to build Web pages that I browse (yeah, nearly all of them – I’m SUCH a nerd!). When I looked at the code behind the John McCain splash page I nearly choked on my midnight snack (Justine made brownies!). Dreamweaver? Seriously? Dreamweaver? I’m all for reform on spending, but c’mon John, couldn’t your staff paid a little more for a better “grow your own” designer? You’re using out-of-the-box MM_ functions for Christ’s sake! Maybe it’s the same designer that got Photoshop 6 finally. I’m so annoyed, I’m leaving it at that.

Second, off to Obama’s code (still talking about the splash pages here, folks. Follow along). What a breathe of fresh air. In the <head> area of the code (the stuff that includes searchable keywords, titles of pages, etc), the Obama staff took it upon themselves to include keywords of common misspellings of Barack Obama’s name – I noticed that throughout Obama’s political career, he’s had to overcome the misspelling and mispronunciation issue time and again (watched a PBS special on the two presidential nominees tonight). So, there’s a point for Obama’s team.

Still on Obama’s code, I noticed that they use some pretty nifty CSS (the code that styles colors, page layout, stuff like that) tricks, like input[type="text"]. Thats some fancy code in this developers mind. Also, Obama’s team is using JQuery and auto-loading Firebug! Take that, Dreamweaver!

4. Finally, the main Web sites.

Right now, it’s 2:20 AM and I’m really not in the mood to discuss the deeper parts of the Web sites. I know, I know, you’re all disappointed, but come on! I totally gave you a lot to read with 1-3 up there. Get off my back. Both Web sites do a good job in their pure size, while I still have to give the clarity and less AOL-looking layout award to the Obama team. The McCain Web site is just a color explosion that makes my tummy hurt.

I’ll do a deeper review at some point (yeah, right).

One last thing (before the asterisk that you all forgot about that appears below): None of the crap I wrote tonight will sway my vote towards or away from a candidate. While I do believe one candidate knows modern computing better than the other, I absolutely certain that neither fired up TextMate, BBEdit, Dreamweaver, or god-forbid FrontPage on their own to craft these Web sites. It takes a village of in-house designers, developers, and writers to put together these beasts (that, or it’s all outsourced).

* Ahh, you forgot about the footnote, eh? Well, look back in the first few lines. There, I mention the two major candidates, careful not to say “these two dudes are your choice, that’s it. A or B.” While I do believe these two are the most likely candidates, I won’t exclude anyone else that may be on the ballot and risk pissing off say, eight nor nine people that will still vote for Nader.

Damn It Feels Good To Be A Banker — A Wall Street Musical from Leveraged Sell-Out on Vimeo.

And The Official Obama/McCain Debate Drinking Game

A few months ago, I created a sticker that I distributed throughout Seattle. As time went on, I got several requests to turn these into t-shirts.

Tonight, I got the last request that broke the resistance’s proverbial back (wow, that was horrible).

I’ve created a CafePress Web store for selling the “I Drink Your Mocha” t-shirts.

I’ve added a $2.00 markup to the shirts, I hope you readers don’t mind. My wife reminds me that I do way too much, for way too cheap (free most times!).

If my site is down, this post won’t serve much of a purpose, but in the meantime, it might serve as notice to a few people that might check in before the switch.

woot!

Chad

Taking a hint from Justine, I’m going to take a break from blogging for awhile, at least until I have something intelligent to write. At least until I have an extensive post to write, as well (these one paragraph posts about my life and my work are tiring).

While I’m away, might I suggest some of the sites I visit daily? They’re all I’ve needed to keep informed for some time:

1. The Seattle Times
2. Mike Davidson’s blog (of Newsvine.com fame)
3. Newsvine.com
4. Kelly Smith (of Curious Office / Imagekind.com fame)

See you outside.

Over at divinecaroline.com, there’s a post about wedding photos we’ll all remember. This is a great list of photos that are humorous in their candidness.

Of course, I think the photos that Sean Flanigan took of our wedding came out great, including the fantastic candids (the majority of his photos could be classified as either candid or ‘in the moment,’ a feature I love about his style). Tasia and Jemma took the cake for the finger-in-the-nose shot (above).

The first evening we arrived, exhausted, dragging suitcases behind us, morale a little bit bruised, the Kurdish family sent over their representative – a 9 year old boy missing two front teeth, holding a lopsided cake, “We’re Abu Mohammed’s house- across from you- mama says if you need anything, just ask- this is our number. Abu Dalia’s family live upstairs, this is their number. We’re all Iraqi too… Welcome to the building.”

I cried that night because for the first time in a long time, so far away from home, I felt the unity that had been stolen from us in 2003.

That paragraph came at the end of her most recent post on moving to Syria, and admitting that she and her family are now refugees.

Why does the world tolerate our war?

Mike Davidson, Newsvine.com, and over a dozen other sources have all been blogging today about the acquisition of Newsvine.com by MSNBC.com.

Unfortunately, I’m sick today and won’t be writing much about this, although I do have lots of opinions on the acquisition. Also, I highly doubt my opinions will be so unique that the other sources won’t have already covered them by the time I am repaired.

Update: Ok, so I’m feeling better today and it’s time I weigh in with my meager opinion.

As someone that works with “news” (quotes are sometimes important there, aren’t they?), I’m often faced with an argument of “should we allow user generated content in our product(s)?”

For me, the argument isn’t whether or not you should ‘allow,’ it’s at what level. For me, the argument is user generated content vs. user contributed content.  You see, I’ve always felt that the Internet was a grea way to get instant feedback on what works in a news organization and what doesn’t (for instance, what stories online gather the largest audience; this information may help build tomorrows leader story). This theory doesn’t always work, of course (considering America’s apparent obsession with reality TV and celebrity disasters), but when it does, instant feedback is a godsend. Further, a news organization already accepts contributions and suggestions (what do you think news wires are for?), so why not glean content from your core audience and feed it back to them?

Ok, that last line was a bit OSNAP.net-ish, so I’ll back off a little. What I’m trying to get at is my hope’s for Newsvine.com in the future are the following:

• MSNBC.com will use Newsvine.com as-is; meaning, they’ll just watch how Newsvine.com authors, contributors and visitors interact with the Web site and what ‘they’ find important (they being the audience, not MSNBC.com)
• MSNBC.com will integrate the user contributed portions of Newsvine.com into their own Web network, leaving the user generated portions alone.

There’s a lot more to be said about this deal (such as, hey Mike! mind giving me some pointers on MagStand?), which will have to wait until later. I can only handle so much on the computer today.

The smart folks over at Curious Office have a good post today about user needs and how it relates to marketing.

I cannot overstate how important it is to remember the “fail fast, fail cheap” idea embedded in many Agile/XP programming methodologies and how well that mantra can be applied to new ventures. Feature bloat has been a problem with my projects in the past, and I’m finding much better success in breaking down a project into “what’s good enough” type of packages. If launching an application with features 1-10 would take 1 year to develop, could the market be better served in 3 months with an application that has only features 1-3? If so, wouldn’t it be better to launch a shorter-featured application and allow the userbase to provide feedback on what new features should come next? Perhaps the users don’t want feature #4, and without launching fast (and cheaply), I would have wasted time and resources on an unwanted feature.

I recommend reading the Curious Office post. You can never learn too much about marketing and timeliness. I certainly am a shining example of that need to learn.

This is the second married to the sea post I’ve made. This Web site kills me.