Hi, this is Admin here (Dave’s alter ego, and the BOFH that  holds all the power. Don’t tell Dave!).  I make all the changes to how the website works.

Many of the articles Dave posts have a lot of links to other websites embedded right in the middle of sentences.  It’s Dave’s expectation that the reader will follow those links to learn more about what he’s talking about.  Recently some comments on the posts on this website lead me to believe that some readers aren’t even aware of the links.  I feel that might be because the website’s style is to bold links, but not underline them, as links usually are.  Sure, it looks great, but if it isn’t doing the job of identifying that text as a link to somewhere else, then it has to be changed.

At a recent Agile Bazaar meeting, I had a talk with a Web Designer who specializes in accessibility and standards, PJ Gardner, Founder of Gardner Information Design.  I’ve known her for a long time, and respect her opinion.  She advised me to put back the underlining of links, and I did.  It does make certain things on the website look a little less clean, to be sure, but usability is more important to me than beauty, so I’m keeping it that way.  Feel free to comment here and let me know whether you like it or not.

By the way, she also recommended I not put all those links in the middle of sentences.  I don’t know if I can do that, though, because my style depends so heavily on it, and frankly it allows me to crank out short but meaningful posts without much layout work.

Share

I read an article this week on Charles Baker entering the race for Governor against Deval Patrick here in MA.  Whatever.  But the fun part is that he’s running on a platform of not raising taxes, and trying to repeal the recent increase in the state sales tax.  I know most people think we pay too much in taxes for what we get, and that it’s not fairly spread out, and not fairly apportioned, and an unfathomable amount of it is wasted on graft, corruption, and pet projects.  Of course everyone’s idea of what those froms and tos should be is different, so it is by definition impossible to please everyone, but that’s not my point.  Nor is it who is the better candidate.

My point is that if you have a government rife with waste and misappropriation, you cannot get it to “do the right thing” (even if everyone agreed on what that is) simply by reducing taxes, any more than you could make an overweight person healthy by simply reducing their calorie count.  There has to be effort put into uncovering and fixing the waste and corruption, or the vital services will be the first to suffer.  A politician that takes money is not going to suddenly become moralistic because there’s less money coming in.  Just like the overweight person must start with lifestyle changes like more exercise and sleep, a government cleanup must start with eliminating the waste and removing those responsible for the corruption.

Of course, that’s the hard way.  But the right way that leads to lasting success often is.  Silver bullets are for dreamers and werewolves.  So don’t listen to the quick fix people.  You can’t reduce taxes without coordinated attacks on misspent money and other ways of saving money in a sustainable way.  Other “simple solutions”, like the flat tax, are very regressive and have other problems (I’m willing to do a whole post on that if the comments go that way).  No, this one will take actual thought and finger-pointing.  The sheep need to open up their eyes and become critical thinkers and informed voters.

Yeah, that’ll happen.

Share