Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wasn't he one of the 'journalists' who bought into the SCO vs Linux thing? One way to not risk your job and reputation is to be very careful prior to publishing lies about people in widely circulated publications.
I think the followup to this story -- the impact on blogging, relationship of a columnist as a reporter, the degree of fact-checking needed before publishing, what, if anything happens to Dvorak -- is going to be much more interesting than the story itself.
Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
41–50 of 72 posts
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not the first time he "screwed up".
Then politely point out the times he did beforehand. Did he not do enough research and make a politically-charged article in the past? Then that's germane to the conversation. We'd like to hear about it. But calling somebody a jackass is not.
Anyone who "screws up" quite a lot I think it is fair to call him a jackass. ie, Arrington
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#43When in doubt, always remember that John C. Dvorak is a complete jackass.
Please don't attack the messenger, even for a bad story. Unless you have proof that Dvorak was purposely lying, slandering him doesn't make your case any better. After all, if he screws this one up, he's going to have a very hard time getting respectability and credibility for future articles. That punishment is enough.
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry -- strange as this may seem, I don't read Dvorak. I don't know him from Adam. Seems like a lot of other people do, though, and have strong opinions!
I don't know anything about him either. My opinion has nothing to do with Dvorak. It has to do with your painting him as a victim of defamation when he obviously was the one doing the defaming.
If, on the other hand, he was just being sloppy, then it's a mistake. Let it go. All this name-calling says more about the name-callers than it does about Dvorak.
People who are sloppy and get slammed don't "deserve" it. Screw-ups happen. I'm perfectly willing to let some columnist I don't read the benefit of the doubt of screwing up. In return, I'd appreciate it if people gave me the same benefit of the doubt. This is just common sense.
Look at it this way -- isn't this an excellent example of the net publishing bad information and then correcting itself almost immediately? With any other story, people would be talking about how much better we have things now than when we only had printed media.
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't attack the messenger, even for a bad story. Unless you have proof that Dvorak was purposely lying, slandering him doesn't make your case any better. After all, if he screws this one up, he's going to have a very hard time getting respectability and credibility for future articles. That punishment is enough.
I think this comment is perverse. Please don't attack the messenger That phrase has always referred to someone delivering an unwanted truth. There was no "message" here at all, and no "messenger". "Please don't attack the libeler" would be more accurate. That doesn't pack the same pseudo-compassionate punch, does it? Unless you have proof that Dvorak was purposely lying That is an impossibly high and irrelevant bar.…
Please demonstrate this is the case. All I see is a guy who thought he had a hot story, made a few calls, and published before he got all the facts. Looks like the confusion in school names is what led to this.
Where is all of this terrible negligence you mention?
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#46When in doubt, always remember that John C. Dvorak is a complete jackass.
Please don't attack the messenger, even for a bad story. Unless you have proof that Dvorak was purposely lying, slandering him doesn't make your case any better. After all, if he screws this one up, he's going to have a very hard time getting respectability and credibility for future articles. That punishment is enough.
Yes. The source may prompt more fact-checking about the reported facts than some other source, but as I have said before,
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=555734
Consider the radical possibility that any person you disagree with in general might accidentally make a correct factual statement in a particular case.
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry -- strange as this may seem, I don't read Dvorak. I don't know him from Adam. Seems like a lot of other people do, though, and have strong opinions!
I don't know anything about him either. My opinion has nothing to do with Dvorak. It has to do with your painting him as a victim of defamation when he obviously was the one doing the defaming.
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#48This is why professional journalists actually pick up the phone and call people before publishing accusations about them. And this is also why bloggers and "online columnists" are often not considered real journalists.
Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#49Re: Verified: Kundra Did Receive an M.S. in Information Systems Management
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you serious? "They're the most data rich and accessible" Visual design aside, there's a distinct possibility that DC.gov is one of the most data rich government sites out there. The only problem is, well, finding the information. The findability level of this information is about like the hand-curated Yahoo! Directory from 1999. And then there's accessibility. Maybe that means something different to you than me,…
OK, so find a city or state website anywhere in this country that does better. Most municipalities don't even have government data available in scanned PDFs, let alone a huge set of documented XML feeds published live on the website. (And incidentally, it's a myth that screen readers require semantic markup with CSS to work. They do not. Nor does Section 508 require it. Screen readers generally work just fine with ta…
Even if Section 508 doesn't require semantic markup, it still doesn't fix my primary issue with the site: zero findability. Let's see if I can find, say, a map of the DC metro from DC.gov. Probably a pretty common action. Except there's no link to it anywhere. Not that bad, I suppose - google brings up the first result, and most people would probably start there anyway. If I were adamant about using DC.gov to find it, though, I would have to click on "Residents" (what if I'm a visiting tourist?), find the "Ride the Rails" (what a worthless title!) link, find the Metro link (listed last - Amtrak is listed first. Do people in DC use Amtrak more than the Metro?), and then finally I find wmata.com. (what a useless domain name, why not.. oh.. dcmetro.com is being sat on.)
What's another piece of data I might, as a constituent, want to look up? Maybe something to do with politics. Maybe I just moved to the area and want to know who my representative is.
Government -> DC Council gets me a list of councilmembers and which ward they're elected from (ward1, ward2, etc), along with their phone number. Fairly useful, if I know which ward I live in. Let's see if I can figure that out from the website, without using google.
Live in DC -> Civic Information -> ehhh, nothing useful for my quest here. Let's try another route.
Search box: "ward" results in a search results page which lists some full-english questions (that look naggingly like the sponsored links on google's results), one of which ("Where can I find information about wards?" - if this is a frequent search, they should probably think about making this more prominent on the homepage) looks like it might be able to help me. The rest of the results are garbage.
Oh, damn. That link resulted in a 404. Of course, if I were someone normal I probably would have just googled "washington dc wards" and found the wikipedia page which gives me the information I wanted.
Now, let's see how it gives me information about parks. Parks are pretty important in an urban environment, right? Say I have a dog, let's see what it takes to find a dog park in washington dc with their site.
Residents -> Play in DC -> Parks and Recreation -> oh, damn. I just found a list of stuff that I don't really care about. Registry, department of parks, national park service... No, just give me say .. uh, a map of the parks? That's what I'm looking for. Maybe some events happening in the parks. Let's see if the Department of Parks link helps me. Ah, nope. Just a bunch of red links that look scary to click on and are impossible to skim (to find what I'm looking for). And a picture of some random woman in the header with the title, "Department of Parks and Recreation." I'm guessing it's someone who runs the stuff, but I wouldn't know from the title. Ah, here it is. In this list of serifed, red, bold links. Dog Parks. I actually have to spend about 10 seconds searching for the link again every time I go back to that main page listing. Those brightly colored boxes announcing aquatic programs and tennis programs kept drawing my eye over to the right, distracting me from what I was looking for. Alright, after clicking on "Dog Parks," I get another list of links. This is getting tiresome. Fortunately, one of them is "Dog park locations." Cool, there's two of them. Unfortunately, in order to see where they are on a map (remember, I hypothetically just moved here!) I've got to copy-paste the address into google maps. Why not just provide a link?
And the most prominent think on the "Dog Park Locations" page is uh. "Dog Park Rules & Regulations," a link to another page entirely. Not the locations. Weird thing is, a google search brings up a page from doggeeks.com listing even more dog parks than are listed on the dc.gov page. Good goin'.
Let's approach it as a developer. Say I want to make a mashup with one of their documented XML feeds. Can't find anything. I give up.
One cool thing, if rather hidden (findability!) is the school map. You have to go to that tiny dropdown on the bottom left of the main page labeled "Searchable Databases" (very useful title, by the way). Cool, there's a splash page with a screenshot of the tool and a notice that it's now available. That's nice, but I wanted to access the tool, not find out if it's available. I'd assume that going directly to the tool would effectively tell me that it's available.
In short: while I'm not belittling the sheer amount of information available on the site, actually finding and utilizing that information is an exercise in pain, suffering, and frustration. Information is worthless if you can't find it. It's a step in the right direction, and they got the hard part done (getting all the data digitized and available online). Now they just need to bring the interaction style (SELECT elements with onChange firing a navigation event? Welcome to 1999 and Usability Hell) and usability of the site into this century.
And this isn't even going into the HTML and CSS validation errors.
My comments aren't to belittle the engineers who worked on getting the information out there. It's belittling the fact that they hired cut-rate front-end developers and information architects, and ended up with a site that's mostly worthless unless you know its cthonic structure by heart. And it probably cost them a bundle, too, wasting their taxpayer's dollars by building a UI/front end that'll likely need to be rebuilt entirely from the ground up if they want people to, well, actually use the damn thing. And if the UI layer's code is anything as atrocious as the markup and IA is.. well, let's just say I'm glad I'm not the one spelunking my way through that guano cave.