After a very obvious request, I’ve done my best to make Ban Hammer languagable. That is … it has a language pack and you can add in to it. If you have internationalization fixes to add in, drop a comment here and I’ll email you.
Author: Ipstenu (Mika Epstein)
-

Ban Hammer 1.6 – Languaged Up!
-

Distributed Company
In the past, a company’s staff all sat in the same area, cubes or desks in a little area where they were grouped by their job functions. Shipping sat here, processing here, accounting there. IT had the closet. As time passed and systems grew, teams became more diverse. The shipping mavens needed to know what the processing people were doing, and cross-training became the norm. People stopped being able to say they had one role at work, and started becoming generalists instead of specialists. There was always (and will always) be a role for the super specialist, but not everyone had to be one.In IT, this has become even more prevalent. It’s not good enough to just be great at Windows IIS, you have to know Apache, Lighttpd, nginx, and countless other systems, just to keep up with our fast paced world. Thankfully, a lot of us spend our time learning the basic concepts of how things work, we learn to think logically, and apply that skill to any product, regardless of our familiarity with it. We adapt.
But for the brick and mortar companies, many people have sat ‘with their team’ for their careers, and the idea of splitting up is mind boggling. “How can we work if half the people I need to talk to are in another building?” they cry, after a reorganization moves people around.
Here’s a true story.
We split up our teams recently, into ‘Design The Software’, ‘Build The Software’ and ‘Support The Software.’ The designers are ‘architects’ who create the scheme of things and decide how the software will work. The builders do the grunt work and build it. The ‘Supporters’, for lack of a better term, are the folks who use it every day and answer the phone when it breaks. Oh yeah, they have to fix it when it breaks.
Many of us straddle at least two teams, and some of us are in all three, so where you actually ended up has very little bearing on what you do, and more on where you sit. I sit a floor away from people I work with every day. Now, when a server goes down, someone over there may be working on it at the same time I am, and conflicts come up.
We’ve tried to address this with ‘team twitter’ accounts (not actually Twitter, we made our own little applet for it in Sharepoint). Someone will post ‘Ticket Foo came in, I’m on it.’ and we know to look there first. Sometimes we post ‘Hey, server Bingo is crashing. Anyone know what’s up?’ and we’ll reply. Personally, I wanted to grab a page from WordPress and make a P2 blog where we could all just login and post, but that got shut down.(We’re trying to rewrite it for SharePoint right now, but oddly people are against sharing personal information with other people who already have access to that information…) Still, not everyone remembers to use it, and since it’s ‘just us’ and not a corporate initiative, we get people complaining ‘I have to run across the hall, down the stairs and down another hall to tell Bob about this!’ and ‘I can’t hear what’s going on!’We’re far too set in our ways, clearly. The fact that no one is willing to even try to look at the benefits of distributed collaboration depresses me. I don’t have to sit by someone to IM them a question. I don’t have to call them to ask a question. I have email, I have IM, I have a phone, I have a group ‘board’ where we can have lengthy discussions about ideas, before we sit down and waste an hour in a meeting.
What I don’t have is buy in. I don’t have people willing to try something new. “The old way worked!” they shout. No, it really didn’t. It looked like it did, but how much time was wasted running around trying to find someone, not knowing where they sat, when you should have just put a message up and they should have read it, replied, and moved on. Interoffice memos in J.K. Rowling’s world were paper airplanes. Wouldn’t it be nice that you could use that? Oh wait, it’s called email!
The future of communication in a company isn’t going to be ‘How do we schedule a meeting across four continents?’ but in ‘How do we keep our communication flowing, 24/7/365?’ At this point, my company has offices in over a dozen counties. We still rely on ‘shift hand-off’ emails which no one reads because we get too many emails to begin with. We have people who spend so much time filtering email that they half-ass updates to support tickets, so the next shift has only half an idea of what’s going on.
Your company needs to be available when people use it. For a Bank (like I work for), that means every day except the days you’re legally obligated to be closed. Which means there actually isn’t a time when we’re 100% closed.(Sometimes I joke that the sun never sets on our company.) Obviously this isn’t true of all things. A grocery store should be open most hours of the day, if possible. A restaurant should have longer hours on the weekend. An on-line store maybe needs 24/7 support, or maybe it just needs 5 day a week so people can catch a break. But you decide when you need to be available, and then you make it happen. And if being available means you need someone to be around for 14 hours, then you need a way to hand off that person’s work to the next guy in a way they can easily pick up and run with.The future is decentralization. It’s time to embrace it and learn how to use it best.
-

I Don’t Write For Search Engines (And Neither Should You)
I see a lot of posts where people talk about how to make your site better for search engines, and how to write a post for a search engine. I can honestly tell you that I have never sat down with that as my goal for anything I’ve written. Just like I don’t advocate designing your site for search engines, I would never suggest you customize your content for them. The web is for humans.(At least until our robot overlords take over.)At the risk of being repetitive, I will reiterate that you are not making your site in order to be ranked number one in search engines. You are making your site for people to read. If you’re making a site just to be number one, you’re doing it wrong.
No matter what your topic, no matter your product, your goal is to make it something people value. So why is it a search for “how to write for search engines” has so many hits? A large number of those hits are for spam sites, who over-sell advertising and promise you hundreds of hits a day. Others, however, offer the same advice I’m telling you. Don’t write for search engines.
Yes, if you get highly ranked on search engines, you’ll attract more people, but it’s not all about getting them to your site. Once you get someone in the door, you have to keep them. If you’ve ever been to a store where you know you need a salesman and they all ignore you, then you know exactly what it’s like to go to a website that’s all SEO and no content of merit.The part that confounds me is that all the SEO advice is drivel anyway, as it’s stuff you’re already doing. Also, they confuse the idea of writing for SEO benefit and writing SEO friendly content. There are tips and tricks you making your post layout be friendlier to search engines, while simultaneously making them easier for people to read.
Coincidentally enough, Jane Wells (aka JaneForShort, aka if you don’t know who she is, you probably aren’t a WordPress fan) came up with the above comic (with permission from Randall Monroe of XKCD) and I felt it clearly and hilariously made my points for me. (True confession, I actually wrote this post in early July, but not until Jane’s comic did I finish it. Yes, I’m taking advantage of the timing.) In both sides of the argument, the panelists are ignorant of their absolute truth: together, with a good tool and good writing, you become king.
Just recently Andy Stratton spoke at WordCamp Chicago (You can see a copy of his presentation, which he also used at WC Raleigh, at DIET PILLS, SEO, THEME FRAMEWORKS – There are no magic bullets.) and said “If content is king: context is queen […] Content is king, Backlinks are the Emperor.” For years I’ve espoused ‘contextual links.’ I will, rarely, put up a list of links, but when I do, it’s to organize them contextually. A link on it’s own is meaningless for the user who reads it and the site you’re linking to. If no one follows that link, it doesn’t matter how much ‘link juice’ you’re sending them, because no one’s clicking it.
Don’t write for SEO, don’t make links for links sake. Listen to what your teachers said: write clearly, write well. Link with context, and people will see the effects of your work and link back. Write for the humans. We’re the ones reading.
-

You’ll Never Take My Freedom!
I am an adherent to GPL.This means I understand what it means, what it protects, and what it does not. So when in the beginning of August I saw a guy selling 200 free WordPress plugins for $9, I really don’t mind. I mean, I, personally, think that selling the plugins is the wrong way to go about it.
I will defend your right to resell MY plugin
Look, I may think it’s a total dick move, and I may personally find it distasteful, but what I don’t find it is illegal. Morality is something else. I am legally permitted to take a plugin from another site, a paid plugin, and if it’s GPL, I can give it away, sell it, or do what I, as a user, want to do with it. Would I? Actually, yes. I have. It’s called forking a plugin. But I always attribute the authors, thank them, and point out what I did to make this plugin different.
In fact, it’s not the reselling at all that fired up my blood. It was this one line where he says you can’t resell the plugin compilation for less, and you can’t give it away.

It’s highly possible what he meant was ‘This set is a set, don’t steal my shit!’ And to that, yes, don’t take his hard work and steal it, that’s uncool. But where he looses his right to say that is when he tries to revoke freedoms clearly laid out in GPL, notably, I have the right to take a GPL licensed plugin and do what I want. You just can’t have it both ways.
Don’t worry! This can be fixed!
Otto pointed out that, as he’s also using images and other possibly non-GPL items in his product, that in a way, this is okay. Well, that’s nice, but he still can’t take away my GPL freedoms. He can do a pseudo-split license, and say “These products are GPL, and as such, all GPL freedoms remain intact. THESE products, however, are not GPL, and fall under the following provisos.” That’s a lot of work, I know, but suddenly he’s GPL-compliant! Yay!
Of course, that assumes he had the right to use those non-GPL items in the first place. And we already knows he’s buzz-worded some BS.
1. I have Full Master Resale Rights and Each One of the Plugins Listed Above Has Resale Privileges attached to them.
2. Because of the Master Rights, I have the each developers expressed permission to offer Private Label Rights to All Who Purchase WP Million Dollar Plugins.
3. Being That these are Unique & Rare Resell Rights Plugins You Have a Two-fold Benefit,
a) The Personal Use of the WP Million Dollar Plugin
b) The Ability to Offer This Unique/Profitable Package to Your Customers.The rampant abuse of capitalization aside, items number 1 and 2 there doesn’t make a lick of sense to me. First, I know that at least one plugin dev didn’t give any ‘extra’ permissions outside of what GPL already provides. So if we know this guy didn’t ask permission, what ‘master right’ does he have? Not a one, that I can come up with.
GPL freedoms don’t require asking permission to reuse them, they don’t permit ‘private label rights’ (which actually is just marketing speak, and means nothing at all legally) or any rights that further restrict your freedoms.
Another easy way to fix this is to not include the plugins, but instead sell it as a $10 book: The 200 best plugins for your site, how to find them, which ones to use, and why they’re great! Imagine a book that could help you get started by breaking down the best plugins for what you’re trying to do? A lot of newbies would kill for that. So sell THAT. Sell your own work. If you’ve done the research, sell it. But unless you make the plugin, or are going to support it, you’re nothing more than a hotdog vendor.
Free is better, right?
In the end, peer pressure reverted this $9.95 deal into a ‘free’ download by the end of the day, which I did not try (since the amount of layers to download looked like a rip off to me, and lead to a $950 … thing). No one ‘won’ anything, though. I’m sure the guy feels blasted by the people who descended upon the forums (as well as the ones who private messaged him). It’s fairly clear the forum regulars were not pleased by the onslaught nor their attitude.
A lot of agony could have been avoided if research had been done in the beginning. If more time had been spent looking up what was being sold, and why, instead of slapping marketing speak (much of which has been removed). When selling becomes more important than doing the right thing for the product and the users, you’ve lost something. Make good things, make that important, and not making money and selling them. If that’s all you care about, I’ll make sure to avoid your product.
By the way… It’s WordPress, with a capital P.
-

Lion: Switching F4 to run Launchpad
How about a (mostly) pluginless solution?I don’t use the Dashboard on my Mac, I’ve never really gotten the hang of the widgets and I just don’t like ’em. If you happen to use FunctionFlip to turn that off, you get ‘Application Window’ instead, which boggled me even more. What good was this? But I do like LaunchPad because I can sort through my apps really fast. Like many of you, I saw the fixes using Function Flip and Quicksilver, and hated the idea of running multiple apps to do something.
You don’t need any!
This is a two step process that requires you to go into System Preferences > Keyboard > Keyboard Shortcuts.
Click on Mission Control
Double Click on the F4 to the right of Application Windows and the field will become editable. I changed my to Apple-F4:
Then go to to Launchpad and Dock
Check the box by Show Launchpad and that will make the option editable. Press F4 and you’re done!
-

Istanbul (Not Constantinople) Will Confuse Your Users
If you’ve never heard The Four Lads (or They Might Be Giants) sing “Istanbul (Not Constantinople)” you’re missing out on a great swing song. The lyrics basically dance around the fact that Constantinople was renamed Istanbul, but also how even New York was once New Amsterdam, saying things like “People just liked it better that way.” and “It’s nobody’s business but the Turks.”Eventually you’re going to look at your website and think that you need to redesign it. In ages past, I would say things like ‘What would Amazon do?’ to indicate how people generally should not redesign their entire site. But those ages are long past and now, if you want to redesign your website, it’s an accepted standard of life. Both the code running your site and the look and feel of it have to be updated more than with just a slap of fresh paint.
Now that everyone’s accepted the fact that sites will update and change, the trick is how to make a change without forcing people to wonder why Constantinople got the works!(See? The song title had a point.) You can’t just assume your user-base is going to magically divine how everything works and know where to go to do things, after all.
Obviously you can make a blog post that explains where everything went, but eventually that will fall off your front page. So you could also make a new ‘page’ for your site features, and hope people saw that. Toss in some customization on your 404 page (and maybe some clever .htaccess redirects to send people to the right place), and you should be okay.
Should is the key-word there.
Science has proven to us that people like what they like, and changing it is a sure-fire way to cause problems. And once people make a decision that they like something, they will grow to actively dislike anything else. That’s why you get rabid Apple vs Windows fanboys. (Read The science of fanboyism by The Tech Report.)
At its crux, that is why bigwigs tell you not to redesign your site. Not because new layouts are bad, but because people are used to your site and, probably, like it the way it is. That tells me that when you make a change, and you will, you need to do it in a way that looks similar enough that while things have changed, the ‘feel’ remains the same.
The feel of a site is a terribly nebulous thing. The ‘feel’ has to be right for you, because if you don’t like your own site, you’ll never use it. The ‘feel’ has to be right for your target audience or they’ll never use it. Anyone who tells you they know all the answers, by the way, is lying. There’s a reason big companies hire folks to do tons of studies before changing the UX (User eXperience) of a site, after all. Generally speaking, as Matt Mullenweg said recently, “The software is wrong, not the people.”
Have you ever felt like a fool because you can’t remember the 16 special clicks and drags to get MS Word to do something? It’s not you, it’s the product. Your website is your product, and if even one person complains and says ‘This isn’t right!’ you need to stop and think about it. I’m not saying you have to change it, but I am saying you have to consider their point of view. Get out of your monkey house.
What it all comes down to is simple. If your site isn’t easy for your intended audience to use and understand, they won’t. If you change your site to something new and different and they don’t like it, they’ll leave. You need to understand what makes your users tick, and cater to them without kowtowing to their every whim. Sometimes learning that balance will make you take the wrong path. That’s okay. Mistakes are things to learn from, so don’t fear them.
On the subject of ‘big’ changes, there is a time and a place for them. When you look at how Amazon, Apple and Microsoft looked in 1999 and compare them to 2011, you feel like they’re the same sites, only grown up.
1999
2011
For the most part, color schemes are the same and so is layout. But if you were to jump from one to the other, it would feel like a big change. In reality, the move from 1999 to 2011 was all done in steps, slowly and carefully, so as not to jar the user too much out of their comfort zone.
This doesn’t just apply to site design. The GAP logo changed recently, and was universally panned. It was so bad that GAP actually had to change their logo back. Pepsi changed their logo and got more hate than Coke did for New Coke. (Actually I don’t know if anyone cared about the Pepsi logo. We drink Coke in my house.)

Some of the changes were pretty bold, and they all drive home the point that you do need to make changes. But they also remind us that the changes must be recognizable. “People just like it better that way.”











