“Just remove the duck” (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#71

Post by smcl » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:02 PM UTC

bmh100 wrote: post #35

simonsquiff wrote: post #19

There was a similar story, that I can't now find a source for, of an advertising company that regularly added a 'helicopter' into their customer quotes for video shots. As well as being superfluous it was massively expensive. So the customers say 'we don't need a helicopter', strike that out and feel good that they've done their cost cutting. The rest of the plan makes it through unscathed.

The "helicopter" may also be related to the "anchoring effect" [1], where adding such an expensive item with inflate the final cost of the project. That final cost will be the starting point, or "anchor", for clients to evaluate the true value and appropriate price of the project. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring

This hooks nicely back into the world of software development, and the anecdote about the senior game dev deleting a secret static 1MB buffer when their team hit their memory ceiling - http://www.dodgycoder.net/2012/02/coding-tricks-of-game-deve...

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#72

Post by agumonkey » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:03 PM UTC

shawabawa3 wrote: post #60

iand wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful, this is how the Archbishop of Canterbury got picked in 1990. http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/how-george-care... On that occasion the Appointments Committee put forward the names of the Archbishop of York, the favorite of the church leaders but one who had ruffled Mrs. Thatcher's feathers on other issues. To try to encourage his selection, the second candidate was generally regarded as unquali…

This reminds of a papal election, where all the cardinals voted for one of the least likely candidates in order to see how the other's were voting. The candidate then won unanimously on the first vote Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XII#Fournier.27s_...

It's often mentioned when extremist parties start to rise. People may vote in anger thinking there will never be enough people for this vote to matter.

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#73

Post by myth_buster » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:04 PM UTC

I'm guilty of doing this quite often. My boss wants to make some amends everytime we review my task. Earlier I used to try to make the result as perfect as possible which resulted in him asking me to make significant changes which are unwarranted. Now I intentionally leave a minor correction which I'm sure he will notice. So now he gets the satisfaction of finding something in review while I still get to maintain the application the way I wanted it to be. Win-win?

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#74

Post by realrocker » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #53

I've never intentionally added something that I used as a distraction from the rest of the work, but I have added requested features--that I thought were poor design--in a way that would be very easy to remove. Later, when the client finally agrees that it is a bad feature, it's no trouble to remove it. I've also just hidden things that the client has asked removed if I thought they would eventually ask for it again,…

I think most freelancers do this. I have done it my time.

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#75

Post by realrocker » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #53

I've never intentionally added something that I used as a distraction from the rest of the work, but I have added requested features--that I thought were poor design--in a way that would be very easy to remove. Later, when the client finally agrees that it is a bad feature, it's no trouble to remove it. I've also just hidden things that the client has asked removed if I thought they would eventually ask for it again,…

I think most freelancers do this. I have done it my time.

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#76

Post by realrocker » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #53

I've never intentionally added something that I used as a distraction from the rest of the work, but I have added requested features--that I thought were poor design--in a way that would be very easy to remove. Later, when the client finally agrees that it is a bad feature, it's no trouble to remove it. I've also just hidden things that the client has asked removed if I thought they would eventually ask for it again,…

I think most freelancers do this. I have done it my time.

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#77

Post by cmpb » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

This reminds me of "How a Web Design Goes Straight to Hell" [1] by The Oatmeal. It's a different moral, of course; basically, don't trust the client more than you need to.

[1] http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#78

Post by danielweber » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:08 PM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #66

JonnieCache wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are countless fables about record company executives dropping by the mastering studio to hear the new hit in its finished form. They'd inevitably make some ill-posed request, of the familiar "it needs to pop more!" variety. The wily engineer directs them towards a large and important looking knob, telling them that they are free to dial in as much "pop" as they think the track needs. Of course, they screw up th…

That sounds like web development. If I had a penny for every time we're asked for more zazz, pop, pow, shazam, zing, shizzle, pizazz, "something", cowbell... I'd use them to bury the meddling fuckers who ask for this shit.

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell

"Could you make the design pop a bit more?"

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#79

Post by jmilloy » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:09 PM UTC

wambotron wrote: post #20

I worked at a deli during college, and people did this same type of thing on slices. By default, I'd always pick a pretty thin slice. Most people really like thinly sliced meats. The first thing you do is slice once and show them the slice, making sure it fits what they wanted. 99% of the time, people would say "thinner," I would pretend to fiddle with the knob, slice the same thickness, and they'd say "perfect!" I t…

Yeah, I always only ask once, even if it isn't good enough.

Re: “Just remove the duck” (2013)

#80

Post by acdha » Tue, Mar 03, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

throwawayaway wrote: post #68

masklinn wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it's a move which works when people demand changes in order to leave their mark or to be seen as "doing something"[0], it doesn't work in the case of people demanding changes because they actually want these changes. [0] an attitude I find myself unthinkingly adopting when doing reviews.

i have the guilts reviewing work of non native english speakers and asking them to rename functions after review. hard to ask for it without it seeming completely petty, particularly when everything else is perfect. it does represent a minor improvement.

It definitely requires some tact and thought first. The angle I like to focus on is whether something will actively confuse future maintainers. If it's an internal method and the name is odd but not misleading, it's probably not worth raising at a code review or maybe even privately