Web Design Community Project - webdesign.ie - anyone interested?

[daviddoran]

A transition year student whacks up a site for his dad, and gets paid €10 for it

Well I never. I'm sure you weren't including me there

[TheMenace]

Originally Posted by RedCardinal

As Alan said, don't pitch it as authority, but I think to succeed you must plan on becoming an authority;

I think you need to have the backing of the most critical of your peers before you can claim to be an authority though, right? It's certainly something that needs to be explored. "Who can represent us?", as such!

Originally Posted by RedCardinal

but it requires clarity of definition

It requires a very, very, very clear mission statement and that's all. If it introduces authority rather than community then you're screwed.

[figment]

Originally Posted by TheMenace

I think you need to have the backing of the most critical of your peers before you can claim to be an authority though, right?

Would be nice but not often the case. Anyone can claim to be an authority on a subject and can be without the backing of their peers. They just better put forward a strong case Also I don't believe being an authority and being a representative necessarily mean the same thing.

[daviddoran]

I think his point is that IF the sight wanted to be an authority it would have to have backing or would simply be excluded from the community.

[TheMenace]

Originally Posted by daviddoran

I think his point is that IF the sight wanted to be an authority it would have to have backing or would simply be excluded from the community.

Not as such. What I'm saying is that if a group of designers, developers, etc. were to set something like this up then it could easily be construed as being elitist. How are other designers and developers, say of equal or greater experience or ability than the organisers, going to buy into this? Should they not be allowed in on the ground floor? Is there some amount of ownership of the organisation?

To make something like this work, I think two things would need to happen:

1) As the organisation grows, it would need to be independent of any vested interest, be it company or individual. This would entail the organisation effectively being owned by its members and its members being 'voted' in by existing members/peers.

2) There would have to be a very carefully considered exclusionist policy for those that continue to tout irresponsible design/development.

As I said, something like this was tried before and there was a serious whiff of self interest off it which is why it fell apart at the final minute.

Basically it would need a very comprehensive and transparent mission statement and needs to be established for the good of the industry and not the individual or company. If this were to turn into an 'old boys club' you can be pretty sure it would meet some severe dissent.

It's just something to think about folks. I'd love to see something like this happening but it needs to be well considered.

[rsynnott]

Originally Posted by richardo

A good point. The problem is though - what constitutes a web professional? A transition year student whacks up a site for his dad, and gets paid €10 for it - is he then a web professional? Or would it be limited by qualifications? Or portfolios? Or company owners? ....

What qualifications ARE there, if any?

[richardo]

Originally Posted by rsynnott

What qualifications ARE there, if any?

Good question. There aren't really any paper ones. I have a couple of diplomas but I wouldn't consider them worth anything.

Maybe there could be some kind of base-line, like for example three or four published websites? They would have to be commercial sites rather than personal projects.

Just an idea?

[TheMenace]

Originally Posted by richardo

Good question. There aren't really any paper ones. I have a couple of diplomas but I wouldn't consider them worth anything.

Maybe there could be some kind of base-line, like for example three or four published websites? They would have to be commercial sites rather than personal projects.

Just an idea?

What if the sites are rubbish? How do you set a benchmark exactly? And, more importantly, WHO in such an organisation would be fit to judge? I know plenty of self-proclaimed web professionals out there who regularly bash my work yet who are utterly imcompetent and talentless themselves.

It's all so subjective that I don't think a representative body could possibly work unless it was moderated by someone who was respected and trusted by every single one of their peers. And that simply isn't a realistic expectation. There are quite a few bitter cynics amongst us who have been screwed around by this industry for a long time and who simply won't accept any kind of authority whatsoever at the risk that there's a self-serving agenda hidden underneath.

As I said, I'd like to see something like this happen for the good of the industry and, if done properly, it could be an excellent project. However, and excuse me for saying so, but the minute Blacknight or Spoilchild logos start appearing on the homepage then I would have to cry foul. Likewise, pictures of organisers in the Sunday Business Post gloating about how they've 'saved' the industry or any kind of media whoring would have to be outlawed.

Make it clear, honest, transparent and trusted and it will work. Simple as that.

[richardo]

I agree with you. There is no baseline standard. Therefore it is almost impossible to set any kind of standard.

The only baseline that exists at the moment is W3C standards, but you can have a cr*p site, with woeful design and impossible navigation that is 100% valid. So that's out.

As a matter of interest, I can understand your crying foul at Spoiltchild, as they are a design house, but why Blacknight? I'm sure they couldn't give a toss about design [as a company, not as individuals] as they only host sites. If anything, they would be better qualified to judge [in some respects] as they know the business but have no vested interest. Unless of course they only like sites that they host

[TheMenace]

Originally Posted by richardo

As a matter of interest, I can understand your crying foul at Spoiltchild, as they are a design house, but why Blacknight? I'm sure they couldn't give a toss about design [as a company, not as individuals] as they only host sites. If anything, they would be better qualified to judge [in some respects] as they know the business but have no vested interest. Unless of course they only like sites that they host

Sorry, let me clarify. I'm not having a go at either company. I'm simply using them as an arbitrary example of how, hypothetically, any vested interests might benefit from such an organisation if they were involved in setting it up.

My point is that if you want peers to buy into an organisation that represents them, then I don't think it's fair to try and skim benefits for yourself and to declare yourself as some kind of superior authority (unless, literally, everyone in the industry thinks you are!) At the most, a figurehead(s) could be appointed but in no way could they be tied vociferously to their own company.