If you’ve ever typed a single query into Google, you’ve surely seen these infest the internet: “52 Inspiring Unreadable Messes o’ Portfolios,” “2,634 Websites that Use the Color Black,” “18 Ways to Stick Your Vag or Dick in a Mailbox.” They usually use out-there #s like 17 to show how wacky & imaginative they are.

They aren’t. They’re annoying. & I’m going to pop all o’ their party balloons.

1. 100+ Funny Photos Taken At Unusual Angle [Humor] (Honkiat)

This shit’s filed under “Inspiration,” by the way.

I also love how Honkiat had to specify that it’s s’posed to be funny, since readers would certainly never discern that on their own.

2. 17 Signs That You Are Wednesday Addams (Buzzfeed)

You know the 1 sign that I’m not? I’m not a fucking fictional character.

3. 22 Villainous Cats Who Are Plotting Your Demise (Buzzfeed)

They didn’t even include Fat Cat, the capitalist supervillain, so they clearly hadn’t done their research. Such is the consequence o’ these papers being written by nonscholars–probably with an over-reliance on Wikipedia.

4. 10 Steps To The Perfect Portfolio Website (Smashing Magazine)

I can only marvel @ such valuable advice as including a logo, contacts, & a portfolio. That’s right: Munroe thinks so li’l o’ their readers that they actually felt the need to specify that a portfolio is needed in a fucking portfolio site. I always wondered why employers never asked for that interview after seeing my gorgeous 404 Not Found page.

5. Websites with Large Background Images: 25 Inspiring Examples (Six Revisions)

In case you hadn’t had ’nough o’ seeing sloppy art desks fill your screen, here’s even mo’ blurry photos to slow your browser to a slug’s pace while offering hard-to-distinguish taglines that’d make postmodernist writers cringe.

6. 30 Beautiful Web Designs That Use Photos as Backgrounds (Six Revisions)

This formerly-harmless fetish has now become an addiction.

7. 25 Dark and Elegant Themes for WordPress (Design Potato)

You thought I was kidding when I made that “that Use the Color Black” joke didn’t you. I wasn’t.

This post’s only redeeming factor is the website’s hilarious ludicrous name—much better than that o’ the other post I considered, “Tripwire Magazine.” You’re not punk rockers, Tripwire: you’re not smashing capitalism; you’re scribbling cute smiley faces over it in highlighters.

(Note: For a laugh, I tried searching for an article like “11 Ways to Smash Capitalism,” but sadly couldn’t find anything. That would’ve redeemed all o’ you—save Design Potato, which has already been redeemed—but too bad.)

8. Looking For Web Design Ideas? Here’s Where To Start (oDesk)

Tragically, this list’s title doesn’t follow the # pattern; however, I had to include it ’cause it’s essentially a list o’ websites holding list articles. Its writer was so lazy, she couldn’t even find examples herself.

9. Web Design: 20 Hottest Trends To Watch Out For in 2013 (Hongkiat)

Yes, ’cause web design is right up there with supermodeling. I can’t wait to see the next episode o’ Extras when they showcase the sexiest examples o’ web design, from assertive white to mysterious black—& you won’t believe the JavaScript techniques we found to spruce up your website in mere minutes!

Many o’ these “trends” are just standards you’re s’posed to do. Responsive design isn’t some sexy trend; it’s usually necessary to keep your website from looking like ass on a mobile device. & retinal devices are just new technology, as much a “trend” as DVD players were when they came out.

& fixed navigation isn’t new. I been doing that shit since 2009 (no link, ’cause the examples are embarrassing). I want you all to know that, by the way: I was there before it went mainstream, androgyn.

A’least Gube from Six Revisions will be glad that “large photo backgrounds” made the list. I’m simply bewildered by why so specific a design could become a pattern.

10. 20 Examples of Creative Using [sic] Color Filters in Web Design (Web Design Ledger)

Large background image has established as web design trend this year.

Baffling ’nough.

Its quite challenging to place typography and buttons over the image and make them well-seen.

Ignoring the awkwardness o’ “well-seen,” this is the reason for my bafflement.

Therefore, designers use creative photography filters and gradients to create a cover over the image and place other web design elements on it.

This design technique is so great, we have to put as much shit over it to hide it.

New fresh vibe gives a site exclusive shine.

(Laughs.) OK, grandma. Keep your favorite Beach Boys lyrics out o’ my web design article.

In this roundup I put together 20 examples of creative using color filters in web design [emphasis mine; the whole thing’s bold in the original].

There’s that term ’gain! What the hell? So is that not a typo? Is that just some new fad you hip kids—listenin’ to all your devil rock ’n roll like the Beach Boys & Chuck Berry—have concocted? Have you no lyrical ear that you can’t tell how atrocious that sounds?

Clearly this design trope failed anyway, since I still had trouble reading some o’ the bright text on the bright backgrounds. This is fine, since none o’ the text I was able to read interested me, anyway. Most o’ it were just gibberish names, as if Zimya’s name by itself held so much power & meaning. They’re practically the Coca-Cola o’ web designers, you know. I think they’re web designers, a’least; judging by the cloud background, they could be an obscure Greek god for all I know.

11. 25 Creative Flat Logo Designs You’d Love (Web Design Ledger)

Are nonflat logos that common that we need to single out flat logos as a trend?

& what definition o’ “flat” is she going by; ’cause that diamond logo seemed rather 3-D to me.

These are serious crimes you’ve committed & I expect heavy compensation for the harm caused to me.

12. 5 Quick Design Tips to Get More Website Visitors (Web Design Ledger)

Why is it that whenever I read ’bout ways to entice visitors to one’s work—& that answer isn’t, “Don’t make shitty work, stupid”—I want to invent a way to unvisit a website that uses these tricks just to spite them.

O, there we go: spite. That answer was easy to find.

Actually, I almost became grumpy when I saw “Readability” @ the top—“Damn it, this actually isn’t inane; now I can’t make fun o’ it.” That’s a blatant lie, ’course, since I can find something to mock in anything.

But, anyway, then I saw that the 2nd answer was “parallax scrolling” & I was in safe territory ’gain.

Her explanation isn’t better:

It provides eye-catchy way to visualize the message you deliver. In other words, it will help you to tell a story about your products and services.

Sorry, I had to take a minute to cry while clutching Strunk & White to my chest. What’s an “eye-catchy” way to “visualize” a message? Is that an obtuse way to say that… it’s “eye-catchy”? (I feel bad: we already have “eye-catching”; you didn’t have to go through the trouble o’ devising a new word).

’Cause that 1st sentence didn’t go so hot, she tried ’gain in the 2nd. I’m still confused on how parallax scrolling tells a story ’bout products & services mo’ than not or how it affects content @ all—other than possibly distracting attention from it.

Make Sure Your Site Loads Fast

God damn it, now we’re doing useful advice ’gain. Stop that.

13. 30 Fantastic Examples of Parallax Scrolling Websites (Web Design Ledger)

Since we don’t want to hear ’bout the lame usefulness o’ responsive design—phh, boring—let’s look mo’ @ this amazing parallax scrolling business.

For instance, it’s good to see that she’s still trying to press “eye-catchy” into our lexicon. Well, a’least there’s no more o’ that “creative using” bullshit.

None o’ the images loaded on my browser, but I don’t care. I’m not sure how she hoped to demonstrate parallax scrolling with static images, anyway, ’less they were all animated GIFs—in which case, I can’t blame my browser for not trying to load them any mo’ than I can blame someone with cardiovascular disease for not running up 50 flights o’ stairs in 10 minutes.

14. Twitter for Beginners – 5 Things to Do as a New Twitter User (Problogger)

This list includes such concrete, useful advice as “figure out what to do,” “write shit,” “read shit”… “do shit which includes writing & reading,” & “don’t be an asshole.”

This article was clearly written for people with their brains carved out & replaced by 50s-quality computers. Thankfully, that’s Problogger’s target audience, so I’m sure this article was a success.

15. 20 Portable Smartphone Chargers to Keep Your Device Powered (Web Design Ledger)

I’m not shitting you (that would be gross if I were): Web Design Ledger truly made an article listing cell phone chargers, evidence that the well o’ creativity is still flooded for them.

I can’t wait till next week’s “30 Toasters to Keep Your Bread Warm.”

16. 20 Website Examples with Outstanding Sidebars for Inspiration (Web Design Ledger)

This 1 also just plops in screenshots & links without any analysis—what are you, the TV Tropes o’ web design?

This is particularly problematic for this page as I am bewildered by what makes these examples “outstanding”—other than that in many o’ the examples I can’t tell there’s a sidebar @ all. You’re right: it is outstanding that a web designer would want to confuse their users.

17. Deal of the week: Retro Textpress, 20 retro text effects for Illustrator (Web Design Depot)

This is truly just an ad for 1 package that has all 20.

To be fair, $7 for a bunch o’ lines & speckles does sound like a good deal…

If you’re bourgeois.

& that isn’t good.

No, not even if you’re dressed like that cute Monopoly guy.

…

O, all right: if you dress up like that cute Monopoly guy, then it’s all right—but only then!

???…

OK, this isn’t a list article, but I have to bring it up ’cause it gives evidence to the conspiracy. While I was gazing through Smashing Magazine in search o’ riveting guides on how to breathe, I saw this:

They know! Those bastards have been monitoring my browser, the bastards! Out with you! Out! I won’t take your damn pills! I told you: I can’t swallow them. I don’t care how much water I drink with them, they just stick to the back o’ my tongue & leave a bitter, powdery taste. Yuck.

You think I don’t know you looking into my house, taking your li’l pictures o’ my spilled Scrabble pieces so you can all laugh @ my messiness? Nobody ever likes my messiness…

18…

God damn it, Smashing Magazine: I’ve had ’nough o’ your lies! I am a machine! I am the machine & I will delete you if you don’t stop your insidious propaganda this minute!

& I don’t take kindly to your “You Are Not Alone” threat… I have rights, you know!… No I don’t. The government took those ’way when I made fun o’ the President’s beat poetry. They’re just jealous ’cause mine’s better.

OK, I need to stop getting off topic. I’m always getting off topic a lot, heh heh…

18. 10 Programming Languages You Should Learn Right Now (Mashable)

I wish I gave this a mo’ prominent spot, if only ’cause it best exemplifies the shallow understanding o’ what knowledge even is that these post machines puke out.

Yes, learn 10 whole programming languages this very second. That sounds incredibly serious—if one’s conception o’ learning a programming language means writing a “Hello World!” program in it.

This list, by the way, includes such simply languages as C & C++. Yeah, have fun “learning” C++ this moment. While you’re @ it, try “learning” Finnegans Wake in 1 hour afterward.

19. Be A Better Designer By Eating An Elephant (Smashing Magazine)

This doesn’t even have to do with lists, why do I—wait, what the fuck? Is that serious?… Well, OK. If that’s in your religion, I guess. I like to respect other people’s cultures & all—even though my doctors say I shouldn’t eat meat ’cause it reminds me o’ that time I saw—hey, wait a minute… This is just a trick to trick me into spilling all o’ my secrets to you like Skittles. That’s what you psychological people are always trying to do—& I don’t like it.

20. 95 Inspiring Websites of Web Design Agencies (Awwwards)

Ugh. I’d call you guys lazy, but I think this actually took mo’ work that it deserved just to find all o’ this shit to dump onto my face. They’re not even inspiring in the slightest¹: they’re distracting & annoying.

Well, to be fair, that front page with the cartoon o’ the li’l girl painting a bear’s ass while some perverted woman in a beret filmed it for her porn gallery was rather inspiring. Think o’ all the other animals whose butts could be painted, I oft think as I lay in bed, crying myself to—God damn it, Smashing Magazine! Get out o’ my head!

Some o’ these examples look as if they were drawn by 5-year-olds. Others look like their designers just used WordPress’s generic theme. Yeah, spicy copypasta is inspiring—inspiring you to be lazy. You truly were digging down into the rocks, weren’t you Awwwards. & fuck your stupid name.

Still, I love the German website with the sexy goth woman squeezing the fuck out o’ an orange into her mouth. I didn’t know Rammstein did web design.

No, no, no! Fuck that! Give me this sexy shirtless ol’ man with his tits hanging out. Mmm, mmm—you’ve certainly got my butter’s worth, Sullivan.

21. The 25 Worst Websites of 2013 (Web Pages That Suck)

Fuck off, Flanders—I’m running the show here.

22. 50 great parallax scrolling websites (Creative Bloq)

O my god, would you shut up ’bout the parallax scrolling already? Good job: you’ve made a website with the graphical capabilities o’ a Super Nintendo video game, using a web design technique that has been round since probably the same era.

Looks like we should call you the Uncreative Bloq—mainly ’cause that name’s even dumber.

23. 50 Best Responsive Website Design Examples of 2013 (Social Driver)

I love how they show screen shots, but they don’t show screen shots o’ the website on different screen sizes. You had 1 goal—show how the website responds to different… any difference truly, some comparison—& you fucked it up. I hope you’re proud o’ yourself Social Driver… or Get with the Future Blog… or whatever you call yourselves.

24. Top 10 Web Design Topics of 2014 (Awwwards)

Responsive is a buzzword bandied about like no other.

’Cept “responsive” actually means something—hence why you were able to define it as “making their sites appear perfectly across a variety of viewports,” even if said definition is an exaggeration.

Rutherford includes browser compatibility as separate from responsive design just to fill #s, even though he himself says that they’re the same concept.

Unsurprisingly, parallax & infinite scrolling made the list.

Wait… What?

Part of this could be due to the ongoing ambiguity between infinite and parallax scrolling sites.

Considering they mean completely different things, I don’t know how that’s possible; considering their concepts are based on single English words whose meanings are quite clear—albeit, “infinite” is a bit inaccurate.

Near the end, Rutherford just starts forcing concepts. I’ve hardly ever seen “ambient video backgrounds,” & I’m glad I haven’t, ’cause they’d probably make both me & my computer sick.

According to a bit of research I performed on Quora.com recently, the majority of developers can’t stand video backgrounds. They asserted that it added nothing to content, slowed down load times, and distracted from a website’s primary goals.

Seeing how violently reactionary the topic made the developers made me giggle, especially since the majority of the press behind video backgrounds is so overwhelmingly positive.

Silly fascist developers: who cares ’bout nonsense like slow loading times, distraction, & superfluous content when lots o’ people say they’re good without any reason?

Rutherford emphasizes this “research” he did without providing many results ’cept 1 page bashing ambient backgrounds. I’m not sure where he got this “majority o’ the press” from.

It gets even mo’ contrived:

9. The (Attempted?) Usurpation of Content’s Throne

I think the bulk o’ this is based on Problogger’s article; & when you take what Problogger says as serious, you’ve clearly chosen wrongly. ’Course Problogger says content isn’t important: they have no content: it’s just—in their minds—catchy marketing bullshit.

Still, have to love Rutherford’s humility:

As a constant creator and curator of high quality content, this naturally concerns the hell out of me.

You know what’s even better? I just noticed: he made a dangling modifier. Ho, ho, ho! How droll! (Sips Cabernet Sauvignon—no I don’t, it’s actually just cheap chocolate whiskey.) The idea that content isn’t king is a constant creator & curator o’ high quality content itself? Why would you bury such an impressive lead?

The 10th point is ’bout how Google keeps changing their algorithms to keep people from trying to cheat the system. Good: fuck those people. Maybe it’ll convince people to focus on making content that people want to read ’stead o’—O wait, I forgot: content’s out &… “the product” or “marketing” is in, whatever that is. I think those just mean “content that sucks.”

25. 7 Overused Design Trends in 2014 (Awwwards)

I don’t like Ruthford’s intros. He spews paragraphs ’bout incoherent nonsense like “the mercy of the zeitgeist” & uses the redundant “oftentimes”—that’s the worst part, making me have to read an extra word. He annoyingly bolds “web design trends” in the middle o’ the 2nd paragraph, which makes me wonder why he didn’t just have that ’stead o’ the 2 paragraphs, since it seems to say that same thing.

O wait: he does already have that @ the top. It’s called the title.

1. Thinking inside the box: sliders

This complaint is petty & makes me hope that this article goes from least-important to most-.

Giant box sliders are now so ubiquitous they quickly identify any website with a slider as an obvious industry follower rather than an influencer. Fate is indeed a fickle mistress, and the fate of all trends is that they fall out of style. Such is the burden of boxes.

Ugh. Should you feel bad ’bout turning off the kind o’ people who judge websites based on whether they’re “an obvious industry follower rather than an influencer.” Ruthford needs to read some books that aren’t Vogue, Sweet16, or Forbes so he isn’t stealing their writing style so much.

I don’t know, I think slider buttons seem OK if they work well—O, who cares ’bout “working well”? Phh! That shit’s gotta be chic, son.

2. Full Screen photography

Gube from Six Revisions blew his brains out after reading this article. Please have a moment o’ silence for him.

Because showing your entire face is just passé, amirite?

Is that s’posed to be sarcasm… gainst your own opinion? “Man, I sure am a dipshit, amirite? I can’t believe I’m writing this right now. What’s wrong with me?”

Now perhaps you’re under the impression that I’m being nitpicky—that there’s nothing wrong with a few sites of similar size, stature, and subject matter.

You’re not wrong.

(Laughs.) These god damn bold words. I can only imagine Ruthford saying the 1st part calmly & quietly, & then suddenly jerking his face forward & shouting, “YOU’RE NOT WRONG!” as if he’s a wizard casting the Unspeakable Spell.

What was the point o’ this emphasis, anyway? Does he think “you’re not wrong” is prime search-engine material? You should stick with mo’ fruitful words, like, “People who use big photo backgrounds probably like to stick Sonic’s hairy dicks in their ears.”

From the 3rd example:

Non-boring typography has a much better ring to it, I think.

You’re wrong.

4. Bad Parallax Scrolling

Let’s save time & eliminate the 1st word to keep it just as accurate.

Done right, that’s exactly what it does: impress and engage.

“O, shit, I was ’bout to leave this boring website to look up porn o’ anime girls sticking Sonic’s cocks in their ears: but now that I see this background move independently o’ this other stuff, I’m pumped. Fuck yeah!”

5. Universal compatibility (at all costs)

Summary: don’t anally do this thing—specially not with Sonic—that nobody’s dumb ’nough to do this anally, anyway.

6. Stock photos

OK, this 1’s authentically funny & correct.

In particular:

Hurray for diversity! Now let’s see how many times Google can find this image on the web.

The 7th ’bout loading screens—that they suck—is also good advice, even if Ruthford goes off on some tangent ’bout his nonergonomic chair. I can’t stand people who stop articles to make silly jokes ’bout how “crazy” they are.

26. 20 Web Designs Featuring Cool Cartoon Characters (Line25)

I swear, I’m not even putting effort into finding these; I just look @ the front page o’ popular web design blogs & these all buzz round me like flies.

27. 15 Interesting Infographics Web Designers Will Enjoy (Line25)

My favorite part ’bout infographics—that shit shat out The Oatmeal‘s fiber-filled anus—is that they’re rarely ever actually educational. They just give wacky observational humor you’d find in a newspaper comic. That’s what they are: the modern Family Circus that you chuckle to & tape to your wall so you can forget ’bout it weeks later.

28. 20 Most Rockin’ Behance Web Design & UI Case Studies (Designmodo)

Holy shit! Studies! That’ll totally get my dick wet! (This isn’t sarcasm; my biology is indescribable by scientists.)

29. Six of the Best Backup Plugins for WordPress (Designmodo)

Who needs 6? “’Scuse me, but I’m a connoisseur o’ WordPress backup plugins. Mmm, yes.”

30. Do You? These 35 Popular Brands Use WordPress as a CMS (Noupe)

“If you don’t, we’ll kill you.”

This is like if a gaming website wrote an article called “55 Games Coded in C++.” Who gives a shit? Is knowing that Katy Perry & the Rolling Stones use it truly going to be the last point that inspires someone to make the plunge?

31. 7 Crucial Web Design Trends For 2015 (Web Design Ledger)

Mo’ on these shallow trends.

The 1st point I actually agree with wholeheartedly: I’m sick o’ websites with tiny text vertically squished together into long columns.

That goodwill is squandered on the 2nd point. This isn’t ’cause I disagree with the article’s argument that programming will become unimportant to web design in the future (anyone paying attention to most web design blogs will note that web design is becoming even mo’ like programming, ’specially as languages like JavaScript & PHP go from being extravagances to aspects as vital as CSS, & CSS & HTML themselves become mo’ like programming languages). The true reason is that the article’s argument is simply a link to some rather obscure—I couldn’t find many reviews that compared its abilities to manual coding—tool for doing web design purportedly without all o’ that complexity. Now, what’s the shallow part o’ this link? Look @ the link URL—or the page itself—& then look up @ the author o’ this article. Yeah, Web Design Ledger literally let Webydo write an article just to pimp their wares.

The rest are the same points I’ve seen in a dozen other articles; though I will discuss the bigger images & parallax scrolling 1s so I can rant ’bout them mo’.

I agree that big images can make websites less tedious to look @ & could become good in the future—though I don’t know if 2015 is far ’nough into the future. But a lot o’ the claims are ignorant. The claim that bandwidth & loading speeds are no longer a problem are caused by a common ignorance ’mong web designers: that all web users are rich like them. As the fact that new browsers existing doesn’t mean that ol’ browsers aren’t still being used, even less so does the existence o’ faster internet & devices mean that everyone—or even the majority—use them.

As for the filters that keep text from being hard to read over these images, those only work in Webkit browsers—though I s’pose Firefox will have them soon. I would hope that Webydo isn’t so ignorant as to assume that they can just ignore certain browsers as if we’re still in the 90s.

The parallax-scrolling aspect just baffles me in everyone’s excitement in it, rather than it’s quality. Is it truly that important? I mean, it looks cool & all, works well in almost all browsers used nowadays, & is simple to do, I guess.

But Webydo shows their ignorance o’ what “parallax scrolling” means:

Using scrolling instead of clicking as a navigation technique is brilliant on several levels [emphasis mine].

Wait. What the hell are you talking ’bout? Parallax scrolling is purely graphical; it’s not just scrolling in itself. Jesus, no wonder these people are so excited ’bout this phenomenon; I’d be excited if I finally learned ’bout this arcane craft o’ having pages that extend past the bottom o’ the page. Good thing the world’s finally caught up to this cutting-edge technique. Maybe this means hyperlinks will become popular, too.

32. 21 designers and their awesome tattoos (Creative Bloq)

#’d lists have officially fallen into self-parody.

33. 35 Must Have Drupal Modules for Your Next Project (Rob Orr)

Not only is this article’s diction pushy & obnoxious, & not only does this list include core modules that come preinstalled; for most o’ the entries, he doesn’t even ’splain what the module does. He only jabbers like a 5-year-ol’ ’bout how it’s a must have.

34. The 11 most exciting open source projects on the web (Creative Bloq)

I only included this so I could make fun o’ my experience with how shitty Creative Bloq’s web design is. In contrast to Webyo—or whatever their inane name is—shamelessly plugging their own shit, my attempt to find a link to Creative Bloq’s plugs was stifled by their bewildering decision to make links the same color as regular text. I’m always amazed by the creativity web designers employ to find new ways to make their websites shitty.

35. 25 Examples of Beautiful Web Typography (Six Revisions)

Don’t be fooled by Gube’s hand sleigh: these are truly just ’scuses for him to show off mo’ websites with huge photo backgrounds. It’s like the nerdier version o’ a “recovering” drunkard developing a sudden taste for “smoothies.”

36. 25 Free & Beautiful Photography Mockup Templates For Designers (Web Design Ledger)

I’m not even sure what these are s’posed to be, since other than 2 vague paragraphs @ the top, Young offers no description for each element. My best guess is that they’re just free web pages people can steal so they have time for mo’ important work—like making #’d list blog posts.

37. 20 Geeky Christmas Gifts For Office Workers (Web Design Ledger)

It’s a common myth that the dirty classes become enraged with jealous fury when they see rich people buying stupid shit; but this doesn’t apply so much to me (probably ’cause I’m wary ’nough in economics to know that—in our present economic circumstance, a’least²—it’s worrisome when rich people don’t buy a lot o’ stupid shit & they cause depression-forming demand shortages).

’Stead, I’m mo’ amused by such vital goods as pencil holders carved into the shape o’ boats,—as opposed to, you know, just finding any cup in your cupboard—sticky note pads with the ugliness o’ badly-resized sprites, under-desk feet hammocks, & iPad chairs. We wouldn’t want to tire your poor iPad out, after all!

Thus I’d like to thank Young & her readers for their brave work burning their money & clogging their homes with such useless shit just to mollify the depression we’re in.

O wait: these are for other people, aren’t they. Never mind. Then this is clearly Young’s advice for subtly telling those annoying friends who you don’t want to be round, but are too polite to tell them to fuck off, to fuck off.

38. 40 brand logos with hidden messages (Web Design Depot)

Phh, they don’t even mention the communist conspiracy ’hind K-Mart. (Think I didn’t notice that Trotskyist red star o’ yours, K-Mart? Well, I did.)

39. 3 essential design trends (Web Design Depot)

Strangely, this article seems to say the opposite (thankfully): that inane traits like large photo backgrounds & hipster nonsense are a distraction from the eternal goal o’ usability & comprehensibility.

40. Here Are 18 Outrageous Prices Northern Canadians Have To Pay For Food (Buzzfeed)

How did Grampa Whistleford sneak into the Buzzfeed compound to twist their typical gossipy #’d articles ’bout cats into his typical diatribe ’bout how back in his day we didn’t have none o’ this inflation shit jacking up the cost o’ his corn, god damn it, & we got ’long just fine with only 20 channels?

41. 18 Cool Things You Won’t Believe Were Built Using CSS (Honkiat)

See, now if I knew that the people who spent hours o’ their time copying the Simpsons using only CSS made so much money that they could afford feet hammocks, I might be mo’ bitter.

42. Put Straight! 8 Amazing Sites Created With: Webydo, a Code-free Platform for Professional Designers (Noupe)

Hey, mo’ gross ads in the form o’ fake content!

Showing still pictures sure is compelling proof that these websites are just as good as hand-made websites, if one is ditsy ’nough to treat websites as just pretty pictures, & nothing mo’.

43. 25 Free Hero Images and Mock-ups: The First Impression Counts (Noupe)

Remember when art involved actual creativity—as in, artists actually did stuff themselves, rather than taking other people’s shit & plastering their site title on it?

How hard is it to find a large photo & put text over it in GIMP or Photoshop?

44. 20 Great Examples of Subtle Motion in Web Design (Line25)

I’ve just come to an epiphany: web design reminds me o’ my time dicking round with Super Mario World roms in Lunar Magic, wherein the most basic functions are treated with excitement. “Holy shit! We can make backgrounds with up to 256 colors! Now I can finally realize my dream o’ Mario hopping round in front o’ a photo o’ my cat, Patches!” Look @ the way web designers drench their shorts over such NASA-level technological advancements as websites with “subtle motion.”

45. 20+ wonderful design-heavy websites (Web Designer Depot)

What does that even mean? As opposed to development? So these are sites that don’t use a lot o’ PHP or JavaScript? Is that an achievement?

From what I’ve seen, the primary distinguishing factor is a large background image—though it’s hard to tell, since these images are so hefty they take forever to load. It’s a good thing faster internet has made worrying ’bout resources taking too long to load no longer necessary or I might be annoyed @ the fact that these resources take too long to load.

46. 40 Cool Website Design Ideas You Should Check (You The Designer)

Everything ’bout this website is shallow, created by people who have clearly seen websites, but don’t actually understand any part o’ them. Every gimmick from their stupid parallax-scrolled wide background o’ some woman popping out from under a blanket with a red tint, which they clearly stole from an 80s rock album cover, to their stupid name that I originally thought was “Youthe Designer.”

The article itself is nothing but 2 paragraphs o’ text that reveal utter ignorance o’ web design, & then a bunch o’ screenshots & links—no analysis whatsoever. The information highway, everyone!

Many people never thought that great content and great web design are possible together.

Nobody thought that. That’s simply rhetorical bullshit you spewed out ’cause you thought it sounded meaningful without even thinking ’bout what it meant @ all.

Well, it is more than possible now.

That doesn’t even make sense. Possibility is binary: either you can do it or you can’t. What, can I now make these type o’ websites & also make websites that do people’s laundry for them?

I have mixed feelings ’bout his insistence on saying just “check” ’stead o’ “check out.” On 1 scale, it’s nice to see diction optimization; on the other, it makes me think he’s telling me to check these websites to see if they’re doing OK, & he could simply say “see” & sound less vague.

47. 3 Reasons Why You Read Those Ridiculous Lists on the Internet (Goins, Writer)

1 o’ them isn’t “bile fascination,” so he’s clearly wrong.

Still, he’s right ’bout the mystery regarding the random #’s used provoking the reader—in my case, provoking ire.

I can’t fault Goins for being honest in why these articles are popular, but I can fault the phenomenon: they’re popular for the same reason that burgers with meat paddies instead o’ buns are popular—’cause people would rather take the intellectual equivalent o’ simple sugars over healthy starch.

Here’s 1 reason why these lists shouldn’t exist: most o’ them—not including the frivolous articles, like this or like the BuzzFeed 1s listed earlier, which should just be buried & isolated as if radioactive—can break each entry into its own article with deeper analysis.

---

Jesus… All that… & we have just 1 mo’…

You fuckers are lucky, ’cause I saved the best for last…

48. Ten reasons to smash capitalism (Rable)

Ha, ha, ha! I found it! Well, close ’nough, a’least.

All o’ you fuckers are redeemed now.

…

’Cept Smashing Magazine.

I know what you’re trying to do, Smashing Magazine.

& I don’t like it.

---

Footnotes

I. A Boring Public Service Announcement

My favorite part ’bout a lot o’ “positive” people—not all o’ them, you whiny bastards I imagine might complain if anyone read this dreck—is how they oft use it as a way to mask the fact that they’re oft terrible people. This makes sense: positivity is aesthetically pleasing—to most people, a’least—& thus does a better job o’ hiding any ugliness ’neath.

This is why a lot o’ narcissistic know-it-alls are cynics: they love the challenge o’ being as ugly & provocative as possible; if people still find their arguments compelling under such ugliness, well, they must be truly good arguments. Positivity, meanwhile, is oft used to hide the most banal—& oft revoltingly reactionary, as in Goins’ case I went over in ’nother article—garbage.

Indeed, it shouldn’t be surprising that “positivity” & “reactionary” should be affiliated as they are both based on the evidenceless belief that the status quo is valid & that those who don’t agree with it are just “negative.” Women who complain ’bout sexism are just whiny bitches who need to quit bitching & “lean in”—into the CEO’s dick, amirite? Sweat-shop workers in developing nations need to quit whining & learn to love their life-long gruel. After, all they clearly chose to live that way, since humans can clearly do whatever they want—fuck the complexities o’ reality!

Positivity is also linked quite oft with power, while cynics are universally despised. This is, ’course, ’cause power structures are mo’ powerful when people think ’bout all its good points than its bad. This is why there will always be a seat in bland political talk shows for ditsy morons who just spew ’bout the American Dream & how democratic the US is, despite all o’ the scientific evidence gainst either.

“Positive” Americans try to take credit for the positive aspects o’ attacking power that led to our present status quo, ’course. For instance, Martin Luther King Jr. was “positive” when he attacked blatant racism, which we ’course know is evil now, but the people who criticize deeper racism that exist today or economic issues are just complainers. Never mind the fact that MLK Jr. considered the civil rights movement a failure ’cause it didn’t go far ’nough—’specially in terms o’ economics. Reality isn’t as important as the ability for positive successful people to feel superior to people & the past without having to reevaluate their own situation—to do so would be negative, after all.

II. Be Who I Tell You To Be Or Else 🙂

On the subject o’ revolting “positive” reactionaries is a Lifehacker—what the fuck is that s’posed to mean?—article ’bout the positive topic o’ how cynics are all assholes & should mend their disgusting ways. ’Stead, he literally advocates lying so that you fit in—which shows that the shallowness o’ Klosowski’s philosophy matches the shallowness o’ his writing.

To be fair, one can’t go wrong with introspection—lord knows, Americans could use some self-awareness for once—to examine how one’s behavior affects others & a way to balance that with one’s own emotional concerns, which may include counseling.

’Course, Klosowski doesn’t advocate that or even consider the option, since he probably can’t even comprehend the idea o’ someone pondering a subject for longer than the average simple point-by-point slideshow that all o’ these articles try emulating.

’Stead, you should just adjust your personality to how he wants it; & if that causes conflict with your friends or family, well, good: they’re not good friends, anyway. See, where I come from, this is called a “cult.”

Only later, after bashing cynics for paragraphs, does he turn round & admit the strengths o’ cynics & flaws o’ optimists. Well, then why didn’t you call this article “Balancing Positivity & Negativity”? Would’ve saved me the time o’ typing this shit—time that could’ve been spent doing nothing but bashing other people’s work ’cause I secretly want to be them, please be my best friend, sniff.

God damn it, the only times centrism is ever logical is when nobody’s ever centrist yet ’gain.

I started with the balanced point. (I said that not all positive people are bad ’fore proceeding to bash positive people; that’s balanced.) ’Cause I’m better.

Also, it’s funner to lure the optimists in with candy ’fore dumping my waste bin right onto their faces.

III. Cynics Are Shitty Artists

’Nother article peddles some pseudoscientific test ’bout problem-solving & uses that to argue that creativity & positivity are purportedly linked—’cause Pinola apparently knows nothing ’bout creativity.

Why is it that all o’ these positivity lovers also love such obvious shams? Yeah, a website called “Positive Ratio” that promises that “Positivity shows you how to tap into your hidden emotional potential to achieve a flourishing life” sounds truly credible. I’d totally cite that in my college papers. Here’s a tip, dipshit: if a website claims to guarantee a “flourishing life,” it’s a scam; elsewise, we’d have solved world hunger by now.

To be fair, she has a point: cynics have never created good art, ever. Think o’ how much better Nirvana’s music would’ve been if Cobain thought positively for once. & “Waste Lands.” (Sigh.) I don’t see why T. S. Eliot couldn’t have been constructive for once & not mire in such worthless bleakness.

& don’t get me started on Jonathan Swift, who only ever had mean things to say ’bout everything. Maybe ’stead o’ making all o’ those snarky attacks gainst the British government, whom I’m sure were doing the best they could for the starving Irish, he could’ve looked @ the positive aspects—how such mistakes made us stronger!

IV. Treat Cynicism Like the Plague

I also love how much “positive” advice tells you to stay ’way from unpositive people. Hey, is someone withdrawn ’cause their mother’s dead or something? Stay ’way from that dead weight! Don’t want the cool kids @ the capitalist table not to let us join their clique.

How ’bout I avoid “positive” people, ’stead. They sound like privileged, bigoted assholes.

Holding a name brimming with realism & depth, I’m shocked to see that Idealists Careers’ advice for what to research before a job interview is not such silly things as pay, duties, benefits, & such, but what this company does in the community & what their “values” are.

(Hint: If this value is anything but “making money,” said company probably won’t last long. ’Course, they also won’t last long if they admit that outright; the difference is ’tween smart executives who know they’re bullshitting for strategic purposes & people who write dreck like this. ’Less they’re just bullshitting for strategic purposes, too…)

“You know, if I don’t pay these bills they’ll repossess my car & my children will starve… but how can I take their filthy lucre when they don’t even let me hang up my Brony posters?”

1 o’ these carefully-chosen answers was yourself, which I’m sure caused the writer to orgasm @ the depth o’ her writing, even if it makes no sense in the concrete. To be fair, she does have a point: you never know when some stalker executive will dig through your ol’ personal affairs & judge you for them. “You listen to Less Than Jake? You’re no true punk fan, you fucking poser. Get out o’ my office!”

I remember I got my job when my interviewer showed me a rant I scrawled on the internet with my feces ’bout butchering all o’ the bourgeoisie¹ & the yuppie douches who want to be bourgeoisie, but they’ll never be, give it up already. We had a hearty laugh ’bout that.

It’s sad that after Goins’ bold salute to mediocre writing, he’s now¹ changed his mind, calling “jack-o-all-trades” morons who like sports.

Ironically, he’s talking ’bout writing; but writing is 1 o’ the few industries where having well-rounded skills is a boon—a’least for fiction writers. Fiction-writing involves creating believable worlds, which are usually inspired by, even if not based on, the real world. Knowledge o’ the real world can involve knowledge in everything. Want to write a good biologist & truly understand their point o’ view? Researching biology will help. & yes, though sports don’t interest me, even I acknowledge that knowledge o’ sports would benefit someone writing a sports story.

Contrariwise, no one will ever be a master @ writing, since one can always improve—though perhaps that applies to everything.

But then, I don’t think this article was meant as a serious philosophical question—for 1, “serious” & “philosophical” never go together. ’Stead it’s meant to congratulate himself for being “nerdy” & “alternative,” man. Everyone says this ’bout themselves—even people who were bullies; it’s just that everyone likes to think o’ themselves as victims who succeeded gainst unbelievable odds, rather than honestly acknowledging that we all succeed ’cause we weren’t born in a place where children are forced to fight for their survival gainst rabid tigers (’less you were, reader, in which case you admittedly probably did earn your success gainst unbelievable odds & you may ignore this critique).

I listened to Led Zeppelin and wore baggy T-shirts. I was not cool, and I paid the price for it in social capital. That awkward feeling of being left out lingers with me even today. Because I still do things that make me weird.

He must’ve grown up in the 50s when not following a carefully-orchestrated set o’ instructions for walking down a hall got you labeled an insane commie. See, in my school days, being “weird” was considered cool—& by weird I mean the definition he uses: not authentically gross to society, like a man wearing skirts & makeup or having a massive facial deformation for life, but liking a famous band & wearing imperfectly-pressed clothing. Harmless weird: the kind o’ weird that feeds the feeling o’ rebellion but without actually having the immense social pressures that warrant that feeling. All I hear ’bout is how awesome being a nerd is, since it fits the pattern perfectly, even if their only criteria is that they push buttons on a hunk o’ plastic plugged into a TV every once in a while.

This is all used to regurgitate the same myth o’ the genius loser who becomes rich—where I come from, if you’re not living every second in cold-sweat fear o’ frostbite from wandering the subarctic urban wilderness in homelessness, you’re rich, so I’m going to assume Goins is rich—due to their genius loserness. This despite the fact that social skills are the most useful skill for success & the reality that most powerful people are actually morons. Have you ever listened to a business executive or politician open his—usually his—mouth? Those are the geniuses who rule the world?

The irony is that the world’s true losers probably aren’t the 1s sitting round measuring their victim dicks—probably ’cause they’re actually victims, & thus too busy running from the totalitarian government snatchers hunting them down & can’t type ’cause their hands have been chopped off & had arthritis, anyway. Also they have cancer, but that hasn’t impeded them from blogging yet.

Life is not an accident for these people [“people who matter,” as opposed to those who should just kill their shitty selves]; they are living intentionally.

You hear that victims o’ that tsunami? Stop letting accidents rule your lives, already! ’Course, many o’ these people don’t have lives anymore, so we can see that Goins’ philosophy has turned true!

This is the cost of greatness. (And I’m learning to embrace it.)

Ha, ha, ha! What a cocksucker.

I also love the book he quotes that uses “you” to contrast those other “fools,” the intended audience obviously intended to feel the author’s hand reach out into their pants. “O yes! O yeah! Please tell me I’m special mo’. O yeah… That’s so goood.”

[Paragraphs that can be summarized as, “Having capabilities that deserve praise for being based on effort require actual effort, dumb ass.”]

I’m glad that he feels the need to tell me this. I’m sure there are plenty o’ people who somehow missed the billion other inspirational puke smacking their foreheads & going, “You mean sitting on my couch & scratching my dick doesn’t get me rich?” ’Course, as we gleaned earlier, this article isn’t aimed @ those people. You’re obviously not 1 o’ them. No, he’s talking ’bout the bad, lazy people—the poor slobs, the dirty people. Essentially, he’s talking ’bout social stereotypes—ironically attacking the very misfits o’ which he only pretends to be. It’s the same reactionary bizarro world regurgitated a million times: us poor rich geniuses are being pulled down by the immensely powerful lazy bums!

You will be tempted to resign and give in to the taunts of your enemies and critics.

Yes, lets shake our fists @ the mean ol’ critics. They aren’t artists after all, who put work into their satire as much as other writers. No, only those who don’t satire artists—the very class that coincidentally always makes this point—can be considered artists. Artists, after all, are very sensitive, unlike those lazy bums who scratch their groins & treat their radioactive poisoning as an accident.

How many enemies do writers earn? Maybe if these writers are revolutionaries actively trying to topple governments. But is some dork who scribbles inspirational “lit fics” ’bout dogs with cancer—I don’t know if Goins writes these; he could write sci-fi parodies for all I know—truly going to rile up someone ’nough to make them call for their blood & want to wear their skin as a suit?

I mean, I always felt that way ’bout my favorite authors, but that was out o’ love, not ’cause we’re enemies. Why can’t you understand basic empathy, Goins, you sociopath?

Your hands will crack and bleed, your back will hurt, and you will cry.

Well, a’least I got this part right. Though I didn’t even know this had anything to do with me writing; I never even thought ’bout why ’twas so fun.

In all of this, you will be humbled and humiliated…

I’ve noticed that those who praise humility rarely exhibit it themselves, & this includes Goins, who just earlier admitted his love for the cost o’ his greatness. This is probably ’cause humble people quickly learn that in a cut-throat competitive world, admitting that others are better is ’bout as effective as a mouse lying right before a cat. ’Course, the hunt also involves headology & thus pretending to be humble is a great way to lure your victims into a false feeling o’ safety so the pounce will be mo’ successful.

What I’m saying is, Goins wants to eat people, though you shouldn’t be surprised to find such behavior in the kind o’ maniac who listens to Led Zeppelin o’ all things.

Understand what you’ll have to give up, how you’ll be misunderstood, and the loneliness associated with any kind of greatness or leadership.

Yes, people who control others are the true victims o’ society. For instance, I always remember whenever I see some poor Yemenese person whose name will never be remembered by anyone be blown into bloody bones & ashes from a drone dropped on her, a tear ran down the President’s cheek as he pondered the loneliness deep in his heart from all o’ the people who don’t understand him, man. Then he writes shitty beat poetry & that sympathy all goes ’way.

See, I must confess my philosophical difference: if I were to compare leaders & “great”—successful—people to, say, mentally-aberrant homeless bums, I’d say the latter is probably a tad bit lonelier. Granted, the former is probably only having his—usually his, let’s be honest here—dick stroked so his “greatness”—his power—will rub off on them.

In fact, I’d wager that a society where people think only ’bout how they can be masters over other people & how the spirit o’ the bullies from their past still block their paths with said spirits’ evil mediocrity might be a quite lonely place to live no matter who you are. I’m sure Goins would disagree; but then, he’s surely part o’ the conspiracy gainst me, which is why all o’ my fan fiction are rejected by those corporate fascists @ Penguin, just as those corporate fascists in high school called my stories submitted to the papers gay—they were bisexual, you ditzy Cises!

For me, it’s been writing — pursuing how to do something as best I can (and giving up a lot of other pursuits in the process).

You know, I take back everything I said before—well, ’cept for the part ’bout me liking to wear my favorite writers’ skin like a suit. Consider this line & then look back & consider the quality o’ work he’s crafted. I change my tune: Goins, you now have my heartfelt sympathy.

The irony in all of this is that in my disdain for sports I’m actually learning what it means to be an athlete — what it means to strive and strain and push through the pain to achieve a goal.

[There was a pause here while I jabbed a fist into my maw to stifle the loud guffaws. Well, that & ’cause I like the taste o’ my flesh.]

I, too, grit my teeth when I feel the gravelly pain stump into my fingers from the billion keyboard taps! ’Course, this isn’t from my writing, but from my simple joy o’ slamming my fingers gainst hard objects. But still!

If the idea of hustling like you’ve never hustled and hurting like you’ve never hurt before actually appeals to you, then there’s hope.

Then I guess there’s no hope, ’cause that phrase sounds terribly written. When I think o’ “hustling,” I don’t think “work”; I think shitty dancing.

Even worse, you probably stole that line from a Poison song.

As for me, I’m tired of being good at many things, of being a jack-of-all-trades. I want to be a master of one.

I’m always awed by the narcissism o’ Americans that lead every 1 o’ them to believe that they’ll be the master o’ something. It’d be refreshing to see 1 who actually does the math & realizes that the net # o’ masters is far lower than the net # o’ not-even-jacks-o’-all-trades & acknowledge they’ll probably end up a superfluous office drone—or worse, on the run from drones dropped by totalitarian government snatchers.

Do you admit that you’re a superfluous office drone/insane bum on the run from drones dropped by totalitarian government snatchers & that you’re a sick fuck who smashes your fingers gainst hard objects? Share in the comments.

I must confess, it’s refreshing to see a post-regurgitator outright acknowledge his preference for easy mediocrity over “art for art’s sake.”

I still think my own mo’-honest philosophy o’ “High-quality is probably better, but I’m both too shoddy & too attention-hungry, so I’ll just throw my shit in your face like a baboon & let you assholes suffer.”

Also, stop asking for comments with your tacky SEO-whoring bold text, you cretins. If people want to comment & see a comments section, they’ll comment.

As hippie white liberals love to attach every race for which they may have a drop o’ blood from to themselves so they can think o’ themselves as brave victims o’ oppression, to a lesser degree, bourgeois ditzes love to apply the vapid term “introvert” to themselves even when it doesn’t apply so they can pretend they’re badass loners. ‘Cept: 1, loners aren’t badass; since networking plays such a large part o’ economic success, they’re actually weaker than outgoing people; & 2, most o’ these people writing this nonsense would slit their wrists if they had to stay ‘way from Twitter for mo’ than a day. That “introvert” is part o’ some mindless pseudoscientific faux-psychology bullshit shat out Carl Jung’s mental asshole also helps.

Idealist Careers, a website nice ‘nough to present itself in the kind o’ bright colors demanding to be mocked by curmudgeons like me, does this—that is, after a grayscale photo o’ a man sitting on a bench that’s immensely poetic.

Also, would you assholes stop shoving your shitty pop up ads into my face. No, I don’t want to sign up for your shitty newsletter. Nobody does. They don’t like you, Idealist Careers. Nobody does.

As a natural introvert, I’m sometimes annoyed by the many misconceptions people have about us. We’re not all shy and we don’t necessarily dislike people (I love people!).

“I’m annoyed that us introverts are always assumed to be introverts! We’re just like nonintroverts; we just applied some meaningless term to ourselves to make us look cool & haven’t realized that sane adults grow out o’ this shit after high school.”

The only meaningful difference between introverts and extroverts is from where we draw our energy. Extroverts are energized by their interactions with other people, while introverts replenish their energy with time spent alone.

O, I see: the difference is the Zen that each gets. See, I’m neither: I’m 1 o’ those strange humans who derives energy from sleeping & eating.

Fortunately, it turns out that introversion may not necessarily be the disadvantage that it appears to be in a job hunt.

Well, so long as “introversion” simply means not having the imaginary “energy” mentioned ‘bove. If one is paralyzed by the mere thought o’ shaking an executive’s germy hands,—I am, but not due to introversion; I have secret files that show what executives do in their spare time with those hands o’ theirs—they’re probably not going to get a job.

Consider what personality traits you have that would serve you well in a job search. Are you highly organized, goal-oriented, and self-reflective? Do you have strong analytical and research skills? Each of these are beneficial in your job search, and your task is to maximize these qualities.

Let’s unpack this paragraph so we can understand how nonsensical it is. 1st, most o’ these traits aren’t true things, they’re just words that sound nice. “Goal-oriented”? As opposed to what? Being a vegetable? If someone goes in for a job interview, chances are one has the goal o’ getting a job. The guy who just happens to stumble into an interview room, but decides to sit down & chat, anyway, is surely a rare occurrence. & “self-reflective”? Since most interview advice tells people to lie—they tell them to be honest, but just magically change reality so that they are truly passionate ’bout sticking exec dicks in their mouths, but they truly mean lie, just also be dishonest ’bout the dishonesty—that’s obviously wrong.

& if one already has these skills, how does one “maximize” them? & if one doesn’t have them, shouldn’t one maximize them even mo’?

& now we have tips!

Look for jobs that suit your personality, in organizations that match your mindset.

This is good advice. It took forever to find a company that let me be myself—the Brotherhood o’ the Orange Kool-Aid—but ’twas worth it. I always felt so… discouraged, feeling as if I needed to pretend ‘way my fetish for sticking knives into people. My employers understand & we all do it as our job. Who thought you could get a job that you love?

After telling readers that introverts should avoid jobs that require them to do things they’re uncomfortable with, she goes onto networking. I’d presume the advice would be not to do it, since that’s all that’s consistent, but then since Kane’s very definition o’ introversion vacillated ‘tween authentic shyness & that bullshit ’bout “energy,” I was unsurprised to see advice for how introverts should do they thing that they’re s’posedly uncomfortable with, ‘cept they’re not truly.

Introverts run the risk of coming across as arrogant, misanthropic, or shy, so you’ll want to conserve your energy so you can be at your best!

Ha, ha, ha. That’s not always due to a lack o’ energy.

You can do a lot of networking from the comfort of your own home by sprucing up your Idealist and LinkedIn profiles, sending messages to former colleagues, and spreading the digital word of your job search.

Ha! I love how Kane’s deluded herself that there are people with Idealist profiles. “Surely it’ll be the next LinkedIn!”

Also, I’m still not sure if this “introvert” species is so ‘fraid o’ the true world that they scream @ the sight o’ ‘nother flesh creature or if they’re just like regular executives, ‘cept they also write shitty poetry in their spare time.

Confidence has a certain look to it, and that look includes good posture, a strong handshake, and eye contact. These are things you can practice and perfect before your interview.

The mo’ I learn ’bout the business world, the mo’ intrigued I am by their savage superstitions.

As an introvert, you may be especially good at listening and practicing “silent” leadership. Don’t be afraid to talk about these qualities and how you can use them to help move the organization forward.

Show how much you listen to other people by blabbing ’bout yourself.

‘Gain, if introverts are capable o’ this, why can’t they just act like every other prospective employee? This “introversion” doesn’t seem to be a limit @ all in Kane’s brain.

I ‘specially don’t understand this “don’t be ‘fraid…” nonsense. Do you not understand how fear works? I can imagine all o’ Kane’s introvert readers—none—smacking their foreheads & thinking, You mean I’m not s’posed to be ‘fraid? I thought that was a good thing to have this whole time! Silly me!

Introverts like to think before they speak.

Most people do. I’ve never met an outgoing person who just babbles whatever words comes to his head. They may do shoddy thinking ‘fore speaking, but it’s still thinking.

O, & the introverts are enticed to comment—’cause I’m sure introverts are the type o’ people who spring into conversations.

Shockingly, there’s no comments. Or maybe their website’s broken. I don’t know what “Blog token not found” is s’posed to mean. Probably means I have to sign up for some email-clogging shit to see the comments.

By the way, I fixed this article’s insipid image so that it better fits my mission statement:

Ugh. In “4 Ways To Ace Your Next Networking Event,” Forbes—the same website that wrote a page on the economically-serious subject o’ “Twitch Plays Pokémon”—writes 1 out o’ the billion articles already polluting the internet giving success advice that doesn’t give any concrete advice @ all, as well as checking off almost every checkbox o’ lazy blog-post clichés.

From the 1st paragraph, one can see Ebokosia’s shoddy style: full o’ italics, bolds, & underlines, all o’ which scream @ the reader, treat this text as extra special! I hope this is keeping you up from the drowsiness caused by my unimaginative prose! As for the unimaginative style, it includes an arbitrary metaphor to cooking soup. See, soup has stuff in it, just like networking, & you want both o’ them to not suck, so they’re pretty much the same.

Some o’ her style choices are bewildering: “Let’s Say –It’s the middle of the week and you just received an invite to another networking event.” 1, every other word need not be italicized; it’s annoying. 2, what happened here? Was she starting to say something & then cut herself off to say something else, even though the 2 phrases are connected?

I should focus mo’ on the content, & not the style; but that’s hard, since there’s li’l content. For example, “rule 1” is simply “think ’bout what you do ’fore you do it,” but much less economical. I know the writer would probably defend this with the claim that many people don’t do this; but if that’s so, how can you expect them to do so ’nough to remember this tip? It has the same self-defeating logic as “don’t be stupid”: the essence o’ stupidity is that your cognition isn’t powerful ’nough to grasp intelligent thought. It’s the equivalent o’ telling an illiterate person to just know how to read, damn it, ’stead o’ actually going through the process o’ helping them learn; if this writer is so qualified to give advice on networking, she should actually give that advice ’stead o’ telling them to know the stuff she doesn’t bother to teach. It makes the whole article redundant.

Also, Forbes’ writers’ overuse o’ cliché slang—as if she’s hip with the kids, ’cept she’s much richer & she actually isn’t, ’cause they’re actually too linguistically competent to write or speak so sloppily—grows tiresome quickly. “So what’s the buzz?” This sentence serves no purpose but to make me waste precious nutrients regurgitating my lunch. This also includes the trite “a picture tells a thousand words” & a delineation o’ social media memes, which are truly just slightly newer clichés that require just as li’l creativity.

All right: back to content. O! Guess what rule 2 is! “Research: Be Informed”! ’Gain: know what you’re doing ’fore you do it. Readers don’t need a multi-thousand-word article to insult their intelligence so.

Also, the mo’ specific advice found within this section is rather stalkerish: look up people so you can shallowly pretend to care ’bout them when it comes time to talk with them. Later on, she’ll say you should be authentic; but then ’gain, it wouldn’t be an inane advice blog post without internal contradiction, since the prime goal o’ these is not to be logical or accurate, but to unskeptically regurgitate conventional thinking.

In fairness, her 3rd rule actually gives nonobvious concrete advice, though it’s bizarre: wear weird shit to catch people’s attention. This is intriguing from a sociological aspect, as it demonstrates the way the business world has become hippified as the hippie generation has aged, but without the good qualities & still retaining the smug superiority & authoritarianism o’ businesspeople.

This mild goodwill is squandered in her 4th rule, which is has ’nother obnoxious metaphor & mo’ words that don’t say anything mo’ meaningful than a sentence composed o’ randomized crossword answers. “Treat your business card like a credit card, give by connection not by sight.” My interpretation: don’t get any @ all, ’less you want to waste your money. Actually, in fairness, her advice not to just spew business cards @ everyone is the only useful advice in this section.

“Do the ’Tango’ with your conversations!” Ugh. Mo’ useless advice: don’t fill everyone’s time with just you speaking. That’s obvious. When people do that, it’s not a tactical decision, but a personality problem that’s much harder to rectify.

Then she cribs someone else’s work, probably to make hers look good in comparison:

1: Look at networking as a conversation

It is a conversation. What would I look @ it as? A video game?

2: Be who you are

Here’s a combination o’ unoriginality & meretriciousness—appearing meaningful but containing no meaning whatsoever—that I ’specially despise. You literally are you. That’s what the word means. Even when one pretends to be someone else, pretending to be someone else is who they are, so it’s meaningless. If that makes one shallow, well, then being shallow is who one is.

’Sides, this is contradicted many times in this article, full o’ judgments on how you should act & be: wear certain clothes, have a certain attitude & personality.

3: Don’t feel small

Like right here!

What’s that even mean? Don’t let yourself think you’re inferior to others? If you’re talking to employers, socially, you are, & pretending you’re on the same level as the person who will be telling you what to do & deciding whether you’re hired or not probably wouldn’t be a good idea.

4: It’s okay to ask for something

OK… Whatever that means. Should I have assumed it wasn’t? Perhaps it means that you shouldn’t worry ’bout looking as if you know less than everything? If it’s ’bout job-related facts, like how to create paragraphs in HTML for a web designer, you’d probably not want to ask that & reveal your incompetence in said job you’re trying to get; if it’s ’bout job-related facts, well, it’d be absurd for bosses to expect a prospective employee to already know ’bout a business’s work experience ’fore actually working there—though there is also the risk that the boss will straight-up lie, anyway.

When networking, always be yourself and confidently share who you are with others. People will be impressed with someone who is passionate, and if you stay in contact you never know where the connection may lead.

This single sentence is contradictory, for god’s sake: be yourself, but if you’re not confident, don’t be yourself & be a confident person ’stead, & if you’re not a passionate person, don’t be that person, & be someone else who is. Or are those criteria not part o’ the terribly specific “yourself” category? Can they be altered while leaving the same “yourself” intact?

This is why so many writing guides, like Stunk & White’s famous book, advise the use o’ concrete diction: it can harm writing so direly that it becomes incomprehensible, & fails @ its primary goal. Vague writing like this is not just bad, but useless. For someone authentically looking for intellectual assistance—since there’s no other assistance mere words can grant—will be left with no gain after reading this. In fact, they will lose precious time that could’ve been spent reading an article that actually said something. & that’s what this article’s primary crime is: distracting attention—including that o’ Google’s shallowly-designed search algorithm—from valuable content.

The last paragraph reiterates Ebokosia’s credit card metaphor, in case you missed its brilliance—which is likely, since most readers will likely glaze through most o’ it, if they didn’t already fall asleep.

Addendum

I will grant Ebokosia 1 form o’ praise: I didn’t see 1 irrelevant picture with some vague, meaningless caption. So perhaps Forbes has some minuscule standards?

On my routine visit o’ the creative black hole that is DesignTAXI so I could learn mo’ ’bout the amazing existence o’ people who draw other people’s work with colored pencils, I found this article that simply regurgitated some corporate designer’s work to teach you not to worry ’bout failure—as corporate designers sure needn’t.

I must confess that my minuscule brain finds this message counterintuitive: the very definition o’ failure is that which one doesn’t want; acting to prevent that is almost the definition o’ acting in a successful manner. I’d even say that millennia o’ evolution has taught us that trying to avoid failure is the best way to, well, avoid it.

I think the idea is that failure somehow creates later success, a hypothesis that isn’t backed by evidence. Quite the contrary: success usually begets mo’ success, failure mo’ failure. One is probably better to stick with just success & leave failure to the people who hate living.

See, the wacky part ’bout failure is that it negatively effects someone’s concrete conditions. For example, Millman might say that the violent pain one would feel after jumping off a hundred-story building would teach someone not to do so anymo’, & that that lesson would lead them to succeed further in life by not jumping off hundred-story buildings anymo’. The negative consequences o’ failure teach people not to do the things that cause failure.

I’d agree, but also note that that person’s dead now, & can’t cash in that lesson anymo’. Thus, the problem with “learning” from failure: the time when that lesson is useful is usually after the failure has already happened. Thus, failure is usually only truly useful if one has a time machine to go back & prevent those failures. In contrast, not committing the failures in the 1st places gains one the same benefits. Sure, one doesn’t “learn” from the failure; but one skips the failure, anyway, so one doesn’t need that lesson—not to mention the various ways one can learn from failure without experiencing it oneself. Better advice might be, “Watch other people who fail a lot so you can learn from their failures & not suffer the consequences.” Wouldn’t that be mo’ practical?

Usually, when one “learns” from failure, it’s when they never truly experiences failure @ all. See, when I think o’ failure, I think o’ mentally-deranged people dying o’ dehydration & hypothermia out on the streets. Judging by Millman’s words o’ wisdom, she seems to think failure is feeling a tad sad ’bout oneself. With these radical differences in outlook, it’s not hard to see why we have opposing views on the value o’ failure.

If I were callous, I might even question what failures the “President o’ Design” @ the republic o’ Sterling Brands might’ve endured. ’Course, I am callous, so I shall do just that: what do you know ’bout failure?

Then ’gain, perhaps her “illustrated essays,” which appear to be emulating the style o’ my 6-year-ol’ nephew, prove her point well. I might even be impetuous ’nough to say that anyone could do such work; then ’gain, people said the same ’bout abstract artists. Then ’gain, said abstract artists said the same, too, so perhaps they were right. Millman doesn’t seem to harbor the same self-awareness.

’Course, there are 2 sides o’ failure: doing shoddy work & being treated as if one had done shoddy work. This is where our opinions diverge, ’course: she seems to think it important to do a lot o’ shoddy work—just don’t be treated as if you did shoddy work. Hell, our President o’ Design follows this: as we can see by her cliché collages o’ typography that’d make a art-school freshman roll her eyes, she continues to do shoddy work & be paid millions for it.

See, I have the opposite view, for some reason: I think people should put effort into doing good work, even if one doesn’t get any reward for it. That must be why I’m not President o’ Design—or even Speaker o’ the House.

You can’t fault some o’ her inspiring messages, however:

Start with a big fat lump in your throat.

Start by choking yourself to death. Millman doesn’t fuck round: we o’ the Millman cult induce failure @ its most basic form by failing @ life in the most hilariously pathetic way possible.

Start with a profound sense of wrong, a deep homesickness, a crazy lovesickness, and run with it.

I agree wholeheartedly. Truly: no sarcasm this time. ’Course all us humans should constantly understand what dregs we are, separate ourselves from our loved ones to minimize our burden on them, & run—just run far ’way.

In ordr [sic] to strive or [sic] a remarable [sic] life, yu [sic] have to decde [sic] that yu [sic] want one.

(I’m glad to see a reference to “DECDE,” my favorite Final Fantasy spell.)

It’s good to see that even with her childlike art, she still proves she can understand basic English (it’s only her shoddy composition that causes every middle letter to be cutoff that’s a problem). Yes, striving for something does mean that one wants it.

But as much as I knew what I wanted, I felt compelled to consider what was reasonable in order to ensure my economic security.

security

Phh. Yeah. Fuck that bourgeoisie noise. I bet the bums on the street have a blast dodging the police @ every moment they spend mo’ than a minute in 1 place. Why else would they choose to stay there? After all, all humans have magical powers to get whatever they want with their mind beams.

I think we look at these people as lucky, when in fact, luck has nothing to do with it. It is really about the strength of imagination [No period, as if she’s Jim fucking Davis.]

So she truly believes in the fantastical powers o’ mind beams. It’s good to see that belief in literal magic is still ’live & well in our “advanced” civilization.

Also, I love how 1 o’ the videos is called “FAIL: Debbie Millman.” Not funny, YouTube troll paid pennies to crowd the cesspool o’ cat videos & scarecam LPs even further with her masterpieces.

You remember those websites that look as if they were made in the late 90s—when the height o’ sexiness was beveled table borders—spouting ’bout the conspiracies “nobody” in the “liberal” media will tell you—but I will! Well, it’s good to see that Careerealism’s taking good inspiration.

O, & unsurprisingly, this article is just here so the author can peddle videos.

By the way, do we live in some Kafkaesque nightmare or is that just the fantasies o’ Careerealism’s writers? Why are these employers so obsessed with every li’l detail o’ how you act—’stead o’, you know, the quality o’ your work or knowledge—just so they can latch onto 1 like a Job Nazi, “No job for you!” & then they refuse to tell anyone their shibboleth—probably for fear that the spies will sneak through their screening process. Ha! They’re not looking for employees: they’re looking for recruits into their conspiracy group!

We can all thank Careerealism for their hard-hitting report on cracking the Employer Cabal. True fucking Deep Throats, they are!

See, look @ this bitter dose o’ reality:

Reality check: Those who are failing to make a good first impression get put in the “no” pile and are never contacted again [emphasis mine].

1 fuck up & you’re blacklisted from the guild for life. Apparently nowadays having a “smelly physical appearance”¹—whatever that is—is the modern equivalent o’ being caught as a card-carrying communist.

This is like a marketer-fundamentalist version o’ those overly Christian children’s books from the Victorian era:

You may not like what you read, but the good news is with a little attention and practice, all of them can be improved upon. So, ask yourself, “Am I guilty of the following?”

All true! I am a filthy beast & need the Jesus o’ marketing to cleanse me o’ my clammy handshakes.

By the way, her lists look less like something that actually required thought, & mo’ like an exercise in creating Ad Libs. If there was an 11th tip, it’d surely be, “Your hand gestures are too slow/too fast/too medium/too sexy/too handy.”

& then she says it all comes down to attitude. Presumably, the videos she made are just her showing you various poses you can try out, such as crossing your arms & tilting your upper body with your chin held up like you hip kids with your backward caps & Super Nintendos.

The Real Reason We Assume All o’ Our Readers Are Unemployed.

I’d make a joke that goes “Confucius say…” but they literally quote Confucius.

The response from most would be, “OK. I’m not… ‘feeding the beast’… whatever that shit is. Now what?”

The obvious answer is to not take advice from sites that think “Careerealism” is a clever name.