Ethical sign off

This week on the Boagworld web design podcast, we discuss whether we need design sign off and what role ethics play in our industry.

Play

Paul Boag:
This week on the Boagworld web design podcast we discuss whether you need design sign-off and what role ethics plays in the industry.

Hello and welcome to Boagworld.com, the podcast for all those involved in designing, developing and running websites on a daily basis. My name is Paul Boag and joining me via crackly phone line—at least for me if not for you—is Marcus Lillington.

Marcus Lillington:
Hello, Paul. Is my phone line crackly?

Paul Boag:
No, I’ve got a rubbish line, haven’t I? Don’t you remember all the broadband problems I’ve had?

Marcus Lillington:
Oh, yeah.

Paul Boag:
So I’ve got like noise on the line but then it isn’t apparently. Every time a BT engineer comes around it miraculously goes quiet. It’s like when you go to the doctors, you instantly feel better, don’t you, the moment you step into a doctor’s surgery.

Marcus Lillington:
Yeah, I haven’t been to the doctors for many a moon. You gave me a special treat this afternoon, Paul.

Paul Boag:
Did I?

Marcus Lillington:
Because I’ve got an old fashioned phone on my desk.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Which I use for dialing out because it’s got a curly wire and it’s solid and it doesn’t – it isn’t all crackly. But I have it permanently forwarded to my mobile…

Paul Boag:
Right.

Marcus Lillington:
…which is quite sensible but I had to turn it off and when you rang it did that lovely old ringy, ringy sound.

Paul Boag:
Oh a proper old fashioned ringy, ringy?

Marcus Lillington:
Yeah, yeah, with a bell and everything.

Paul Boag:
That is awesome. I like that a lot. I haven’t had a phone line like that for years. I might have to go and buy one especially for when we record the podcast remotely like this.

Marcus Lillington:
It is my desk phone.

Paul Boag:
That sounds brilliant. I am going to get one of them.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
You could even get ones that you can dock your iPhone with. Have you seen those?

Marcus Lillington:
No.

Paul Boag:
It’s like an old fashioned phone and you dock your iPhone and then you can – not only does it charge your iPhone, you can also take calls via the phone. It’s so funny.

Marcus Lillington:
That would be great.

Paul Boag:
I know.

Marcus Lillington:
Well I got this – I can’t even remember who it was. Dreadful, isn’t it? Somebody bought it for me for a Christmas present a couple of years ago. And it’s great and it’s really good. As I say I always use it to dial out but because it hasn’t got answering machine or anything like that and it’s always handy to be forwarding to your mobile, it’s just permanently on forward.

Paul Boag:
There you go.

Marcus Lillington:
So there you go. I have to say, Paul, in the intro it sounded like something where you had to pay attention to Essex.

Paul Boag:
Not Essex, ethics. Honestly. No, we’re going to talk about ethics and whether you know becoming a web designer you are essentially selling your soul…

Marcus Lillington:
Right. Okay, interesting.

Paul Boag:
…which is going to be quite good. And we’re also talking about design sign-off and we’ll have a big old argument about that which will be good. So that’s good. But we’ve managed to get oh how many minutes into the podcast we are without talking about all of the new cool Apple goodies that have come along.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, I’ve spent about two days downloading stuff and I haven’t really noticed any difference apart from the better design on the calendar.

Paul Boag:
Yes, yeah.

Marcus Lillington:
I haven’t used Pages or Keynote or Numbers yet.

Paul Boag:
Well I’ve been using Keynote because I – this is going to – I am going to make a load of UX specialist now roll their eyes. I like to wireframe in Keynote, don’t ask me why, it just works for me. And the new Keynote is lovely, really like it. Really like it indeed. Delightful.

Marcus Lillington:
I guess the problem with wireframing in Keynote is sharing it and changing it.

Paul Boag:
No you can save it as a PDF.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, but then you can’t – somebody else can’t easily change it.

Paul Boag:
Oh, no. No, I don’t – yes, but then that works perfectly for me because obviously when I do it, it’s perfect and if anyone else touched it, they would only ruin it.

Marcus Lillington:
Maybe we’ve just found the flaw.

Paul Boag:
I don’t think that’s a flaw. I think that’s a plus because it prevents amateurs coming along and ruining my quality work.

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t think that’s quite true, is it Paul?

Paul Boag:
Is it not? I want it to be true.

Marcus Lillington:
No. You should be using Axure like the rest of us.

Paul Boag:
Yes, but then, you see, the problem with that is that’s just as similar, just the same. That you have to have Axure in order to be able to edit it. How much is Keynote? Oh, free now. How much is Axure? Flipping fortune.

Marcus Lillington:
No, but you can do – yeah, it is as expensive, that’s true, but that’s because it’s stable and it does – it has the most…

Paul Boag:
Keynote is stable.

Marcus Lillington:
Compared to other…

Paul Boag:
Oh, other wireframing, yeah. Okay.

Marcus Lillington:
Other wireframing tools that give you plug-ins to do stuff, you know like drop-down menus. Bam, done. I assume Keynote doesn’t do that.

Paul Boag:
Well it actually does. So what I have done is download – you can download – various people have kind of mocked up common elements like dropdown menus and, you know, all the things that you use on a normal website. You just drag them and drop them into your page.

Marcus Lillington:
Right, so when you publish it to a URL, they actually work?

Paul Boag:
Oh, no, no, no, no, no. It’s not a prototyping tool. You can’t use Keynote for prototyping. No, in that case you need Axure.

Marcus Lillington:
Axure.

Paul Boag:
What is it?

Marcus Lillington:
Axure.

Paul Boag:
Axure. I don’t like it, it’s a horrible app. Runs like crap on my old MacBook Air as well.

Marcus Lillington:
Oh, that’s the second reference to my old MacBook Air.

Paul Boag:
Yes, because my MacBook Air is struggling to run Maverick and Skype is shit on it. So there is only one thing for it, Marcus.

Marcus Lillington:
Absolutely.

Paul Boag:
A new MacBook Pro. Have you seen the new MacBook Pro?

Marcus Lillington:
No.

Paul Boag:
Oh, I’ve made that up. There isn’t one.

Marcus Lillington:
There was, wasn’t there?

Paul Boag:
There was a while ago.

Marcus Lillington:
There was a 13 inch retina which I nearly bought.

Paul Boag:
What I think I need is a Mac Pro. One of those, you know, the vases. The black vase that you can put your plants in.

Marcus Lillington:
Have they come out yet?

Paul Boag:
No, they are coming out in December.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay.

Paul Boag:
It’s total overkill for me because like, you know, I want a 12 core Mac Pro in order to run Skype and open Keynote presentations.

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t think you do. What you need, Paul, is – what was the other thing they launched?

Paul Boag:
iPad air.

Marcus Lillington:
That’s the one.

Paul Boag:
No, I don’t want one of them.

Marcus Lillington:
You might snap it.

Paul Boag:
No, I’m going to get the iPad mini retina instead. I’ve decided I like the size of the iPad mini more than the full blown iPad.

Marcus Lillington:
So do I, much more.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
But there is no such thing as an iPad mini retina, is there?

Paul Boag:
Yes, there is. They released that too. I am not making that one up.

Marcus Lillington:
I missed that.

Paul Boag:
Ah, see you’ve got to pay attention.

Marcus Lillington:
Right. Go and talk to yourself for a while.

Paul Boag:
So it’s got all the same innards as the iPad air basically but is a smaller screen size.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay.

Paul Boag:
So it’s pretty cool. It’s faster, blah, blah, blah. Why they didn’t put fingerprint readers on it. So that means I am going to continue this annoying thing that I’ve got with the iPhone 5S. I am using the fingerprint reader obviously on that to open it up and then I my pick up my iPad, put my finger on the button and wait and of course nothing happens which is not great, but there you go.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, there it is. It’s not ready till the end of November.

Paul Boag:
No, we’ve got a little bit of a wait on that one which is annoying.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
But I’m definitely getting one. I’m going to sell my iPad mini and then use that money to put it towards the new one.

Marcus Lillington:
Well, I kind of did that with my new iPhone.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
I basically paid £50 for the new one.

Paul Boag:
Yeah, you traded in the old one, did you?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
On a contract but it’s great.

Paul Boag:
Yes. So there you go. So lots of goodies to play with, but yes, it’s alright. I haven’t quite got the – you know it takes a while to find all the little things, the little improvements and I don’t think I’ve found them all yet. So I’m a bit disinterested in Maverick.

Marcus Lillington:
Well yes, I mean to be honest I didn’t really have a problem with the previous operating system.

Paul Boag:
No.

Marcus Lillington:
So it’s kind of like well yeah, great.

Paul Boag:
I’ll tell you one thing they have improved which I got very excited about because you know I use voice dictation a lot.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Well now I don’t need Dragon Dictate any more because their voice dictation now is local on the machine, so it’s not like on the iPhone where it kind of sends it up into the cloud to translate it and then brings it back down.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay.

Paul Boag:
So you can do it locally on the machine and it’s really good. I really like that. So I’m voice dictating everything. This entire podcast in fact.

Marcus Lillington:
Me too.

Paul Boag:
I was going to say, because otherwise it would just be my parts of the podcast and we wouldn’t have yours.

Marcus Lillington:
I could do that.

Paul Boag:
We wouldn’t want to miss your words of wisdom, would we?

Marcus Lillington:
Absolutely not.

Paul Boag:
No. So should we talk about some web design stuff? What the house is proposing, what silly ideas the house has got this week.

Marcus Lillington:
We can do. I just want to have a quick moan.

Paul Boag:
Oh, right. Do we need to make this an official part of the show? Marcus’s moan. We could do a jingle and everything.

Marcus Lillington:
We could. Oh, can I do a jingle?

Paul Boag:
Yes, you do a Marcus’s moan jingle.

Marcus Lillington:
I’m not going to – well, I haven’t got time to do that at the moment, but yes, maybe I will. I’d like to do some new music one day and I could do some new jingles at the same time. I don’t always moan. Normally I just go oh, and that. But this week it’s a moan about the fact that our lovely new office still hasn’t got bloody broadband in it.

Paul Boag:
Well what’s the problem with stealing the hotel’s broadband next door? Can’t we just carry on doing that forever?

Marcus Lillington:
Well it doesn’t. It keeps stalling and it’s about the same as running off an old wind up connection.

Paul Boag:
Ahhh.

Marcus Lillington:
And we haven’t got a meeting room table yet but I have been told when that’s arriving.

Paul Boag:
Oh, when is that arriving?

Marcus Lillington:
Next Wednesday.

Paul Boag:
So everybody – listeners here, you heard here first. Our office table is arriving next Wednesday.

Marcus Lillington:
Which is kind of handy because that’s when we’re recording the next podcast.

Paul Boag:
Hurrah.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
That works out well. And also we’ve got a client coming over that day.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, because that would have been interesting, wouldn’t it?

Paul Boag:
Yes. Having a meeting with no office table. But there you go. So yes, good stuff. Let’s talk about our debate topics of the day.

Do we need design sign-off?

This house proposes that we should no longer ask clients to sign off a design before we build it.

Have your say!

Okay. So our first debate. Now I’m looking forward to this one because it came up, didn’t it, this idea of discussing this came up a few weeks back, I can’t remember when. When we were talking about something else. And I said I don’t think we need to do design sign-off any more and you did this sharp intake of breath.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
And we were about to start arguing about it and then we thought no, we should shall not, we shall save that argument for another day. And that day has come.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly.

Paul Boag:
So you’re ready?

Marcus Lillington:
I might have changed my mind by now.

Paul Boag:
It happens. So this house, in other words me, proposes that we should no longer ask clients to sign-off of a design before we build it. Right. Shall I put forward my argument first?

Marcus Lillington:
Go on then.

Paul Boag:
I think we need to be moving away – in fact we already have moved away from the big reveal, haven’t we?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
So on that basis, if the idea of a design process is to include the client in the process from the beginning, to be showing them sketches and wire frames and prototypes and patent libraries and mood boards and design comps and all these other different things, why then do they have to sign-off the design? Why can’t we incrementally improve the site over time? Why does there need to be this one moment where they have to say, yes, that is now set in stone and we’ll never change?

My problem with it is that, that moment puts the client under a lot of pressure. It makes them suddenly fret about the design that they are doing and then they start obsessing over the details, because it has to be right. But the reality is with web design that when you create a design, it can and should in fact evolve over A, its build and even after it’s launched. And that actually locking it down just turns it into a piece of print design work and that and furthermore is that there can be situations where a client signs off a design and then the developer is implementing the design and they go well, if we just change this bit we would save ourselves loads of time, but we can’t because it has been signed off. You know so I actually think sign-off is more damaging than it is good.

And most of all, Happy Cog agree with me. The creative director Chris from Happy Cog wrote on the comments and I quote “yes, I believe the days of the big reveal are over. I have been massaging the process for years and are focusing on micro sign-offs that move the project forward: strategy brief, style boards, proto-types, full comps if needed, style guides etcetera. It’s a process of progressive and collaborative exposure to the tasks of solving the design instead of a big one-off comp that solves it all. I am seeing strong traction with clients. They are starting to speak this language too and understand the value and they are much more involved in assisting making the decisions which they love.”

So if Happy Cog – if Geoffrey Zelgman’s company does it, then it’s right. Argument closed, let’s move on.

Marcus Lillington:
You don’t actually believe all of that, do you, Paul?

Paul Boag:
I really do actually. Go on. What is your problem with it?

Marcus Lillington:
Well first of all, we’re not suggesting this isn’t an argument about the big reveal so that is – it’s a tangent to start off with, but that’s a side point. For one, if clients are willing to work on a time and materials basis, then there is no need for a sign-off point.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
I would say. So ergo, the reason why we need sign-off points or a sign-off of a design is because clients insist on fixed price projects.

Paul Boag:
Okay, but we don’t limit the number of design iterations anyway. So if you’re going to talk about a fixed price project, we should be limiting the number of design iterations.

Marcus Lillington:
That’s one reason and it was quite a small reason. The main reason is—and to use Chris from Happy Cogs words—he says “I am seeing strong traction with clients.” Well, yes, so am I, and so are you. And I think for some clients, this argument works, but for others who will definitely remain nameless, it doesn’t work because frankly they take the piss. And we have an example of it at the moment of a kind of big managing director type who was involved at the start and then has pushed it away and there was sign-off and now he is coming in and making changes and pixel pushing later on. And no amount of trying to educate this person is helping the process.

So having sign-off and saying look, this was already signed off is massively helpful to get this project completed. That’s why you need sign-off.

Paul Boag:
Yes, but are you not just focusing the problems at one point which is when the design sign-off happens. Yes, I am arguing that actually these problems still do arise and they are still a problem, just because you’re just moving them to a different place, you’re just focusing all the angst and trouble around the sign-off of the design at one specific point in time. Also Bill makes a good point. He talks about getting sign-off on design is that we focus so heavily on signing off the design that we kind of forget about functionality and the overall purpose of the site.

You know people – is it not just perpetuating the culture of design focus when there are so many other things to consider.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, I am not wholly against the idea. I just don’t think it works in practice across the board.

Paul Boag:
So then how do you know from the outset. You know effectively by saying yes, it works with some clients, but there are others who definitely need to do sign-off are you not effectively saying we’ve got to sign-off on all projects because we don’t know which ones are the nice clients, or even if the client is nice, we don’t know if some manager is going to come and swoop and poop all over the project.

Marcus Lillington:
I love that explanation.

Paul Boag:
I know I use it whenever I can.

Marcus Lillington:
Basically yes, we’re stuffed unless we have this kind of huge budget T&M approach and then yes, then you can be a little bit more open about it but there is a but on here. Design is a bit different if we’re talking about visual design and that’s what we are talking about here. We’re talking about agreeing upon fonts, we’re talking about agreeing on color schemes that kind of stuff, layouts and I can’t think of a good example off the top of my head but we’re talking about visual design here and there are many examples where you do have to kind of agree on a visual design process or a theme. I mean the visual aspects of a brand is something that has to be agreed upon and is normally written in stone unless its – these are the colors that we’re going to use from now on, so are we all happy with that. Yes, sign-off done. And there is a certain element of that to web design as well.

Paul Boag:
No, I don’t agree with that. I think that’s a traditional hangover left from the days of print. We’re going to send it off to a printer and so it has to be signed off in blood. The reality is that quite a lot of design issues can easily be tweaked in the build, things like layout gets a bit complicated, but to change color across the site, is really not that big an issue.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, but you go through a process of deciding why you have a color. And then if someone comes in and says well actually I don’t really like that one as much, can we change it.

Paul Boag:
Yes, but what if on the other hand if we do some user testing through the build process and users come back and say that the color is hard to read. So we saying we shouldn’t change it then.

Marcus Lillington:
As we agreed last week, we should ignore them.

Paul Boag:
I don’t think we did agree that. I think you said that.

Marcus Lillington:
You know what I am saying here. If you leave this open somebody will wreck it.

Paul Boag:
Yes, absolutely and I agree with that. I accept that, but what you’re doing is making everybody criminals on the basis that somebody is going to be a criminal.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, and you’re making out that this is such a dreadful angst-ridden process. No, it isn’t – it’s something that we’re all professionals, we’ve been doing it for years and generally nine times out ten, 99 times out of 100 it’s absolutely fine.

Paul Boag:
I think that’s – I am not saying it’s always angsty. No, I am not saying that but I am saying that I think that there is a fine line here, it’s not unusual for us to go round and round in circles with the design when actually what we need to be saying is look, you know we’re not getting it with the comps, let’s just move on. Let’s move onto the next thing. You know rather than getting stuck going over and over endlessly making Photoshop amendments to a design when we just should be going, okay, that tool is not working, that approach isn’t nailing it. Let’s start building some of this. See what it looks like when it’s built.

Marcus Lillington:
When was the last time we did endless iterations of a design. The design process we’ve got now as we have been saying for years means that we avoid that. It’s nearly every time you’ll do one or two versions and everyone is happy because they’ve been through the process. You know they were part of the process all the way through. So everyone is like yes, great, let’s sign it off.

Paul Boag:
I am hearing happy little salesmen here. I don’t see – I’d be very interested to talk to Ed and Chris to see whether they agree with that.

Marcus Lillington:
Well I mean the last site that Ed did was the Royal Hospital one.

Paul Boag:
Yes, that went swimmingly, absolutely. Yes, no, they do sometimes. But equally I can think of other sites in recent memory that design was tweaked and tweaked and changed and changed but I can’t say those, because otherwise the client might be listening in and then we would seem bad. Okay, let’s – we’ve been telling a lot what we think.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Let’s have a look what other people are thinking. So Brad says, I think in terms of signing off for at least progressing the project in a way everyone is happy with, the client needs to be able to make some changes past sign-offs, some sort of contingency is useful here or at least some boundaries of what can or cannot be changed at various stages. And all of that needs to be factored into the pricing.

So perhaps there is a halfway house here which is that you know maybe we’re signing off some aspects of the design and not others. For example, perhaps we should be signing off layout because that’s a bitch to change once you move but you could go well, maybe the color is not exactly right at this stage, let’s change that later. How would you feel about that kind of approach.

Marcus Lillington:
Kind of do that anyway.

Paul Boag:
Yes, I know we do.

Marcus Lillington:
What we are doing when we’re asking for design sign-off and this is why isn’t this such a stressful thing as you are arguing is we’ll say to people that what we’re looking to sign-off is sort of the general look and feel. We’re not saying because we’re not going to do comps of every template we’re going to design. We certainly don’t do that. We’re looking at designing a couple of comps usually after doing wireframing and after doing loopboards etcetera, etcetera that cover the majority of the design look and feel but other aspects that aren’t covered we’ll deal with and agree during the build designing in browser. So I guess to a certain extent we already do that.

Paul Boag:
Yes, maybe. Let’s have a look at some negatives, because it was quite interesting actually. There was an underlying theme here that all of those people that worked for larger organizations, bigger clients, so Headscape, Happy Cog and a couple of others, they were all yes, let’s slacken off on the design sign-off. All those of that work on smaller sites, business owners and stuff like that, they were like no, design sign-off we would be screwed without a design sign-off.

Marcus Lillington:
Which is kind of what I said.

Paul Boag:
Which I kind of actually accept that.

Marcus Lillington:
And those people exist everywhere. And we’ve said many times that we’d like to be able to try to choose the projects we work on to a certain extent I guess we do, but you still if you might love the project but not get on with the client. So you might still choose to do it, so therefore in that particular situation, you’d feel a lot more comfortable with the design being signed off.

Paul Boag:
Yes, where I keep coming back to is you are setting up a set of rules based on everybody being an asshole.

Marcus Lillington:
No.

Paul Boag:
Or that every project has potentially got an asshole in it, on that basis, we should be setting all kinds of boundaries. You know I think the best of people, Marcus, that’s what it comes down to you know I believe that humanity is a good race and that they are trying their best and that we should treat them with respect and love. While you seem to be want to kind of lock everybody away, you know in your eyes it’s guilty before proved innocent or whatever it is.

Marcus Lillington:
I think the attack you are taking is proving that I am right.

Paul Boag:
No, it’s not. Just trying to put some humor into this because we obviously disagree.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, we don’t disagree because.

Paul Boag:
Yes, we do.

Marcus Lillington:
Based on the Brad’s comment, which you are saying isn’t agree. I am agreeing with him. I am saying yes, you should – you are not nailing down everything. You are signing off a look and feel. You are not signing off a big tiny little piece of a design. And we’ve done that for years.

Paul Boag:
Yes, but okay we sign-off a general direction in the fact that we only you know do design comps for a couple of screens, but we still insist on signing off the typography and the color and those kinds of elements.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, which I think is – it’s sensible. If you start making those kind of changes later on, then you haven’t done your job properly in the first place.

Paul Boag:
Well no, because I think some time you should be testing throughout the project and I think further down the line, we could well be in a situation of finding that our color doesn’t work for a certain group of users or that a particular type face that we pick doesn’t render particularly well in IE6.

Marcus Lillington:
IE6.

Paul Boag:
All right. IE6, yes, bit extreme.

Marcus Lillington:
But we quite often that color and that typeface were given to us from the branding guidelines that are set in stone.

Paul Boag:
But then I think we should be challenging those.

Marcus Lillington:
We can challenge it, but you won’t change it, 99 times out of 100.

Paul Boag:
That’s so false. So false. I’ve been talking to like I am doing work with the University of Strathclyde at the moment.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
And I was talking to Ashley, who is the guy that’s in charge of the brand guidelines. And he is really down to earth and amenable and understands you know some things need to be tweaked for the web. I don’t think branding people are the Nazis you’re making out. Once again you are just judging people and making them out to look like evil human beings and I am just saying think of the best people, Marcus.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay, that’s it. You changed my mind. From now on, we won’t have design sign-off.

Paul Boag:
You heard it here. I’ve got it recorded. Now all we need to do is convince Pete and Chris and everything will be great.

Marcus Lillington:
That’s it. It’s all on you, Paul.

Paul Boag:
I don’t mind taking on responsibility. You know how good I am at taking responsibility and following through with things.

Marcus Lillington:
Well you’re quite good, yes. The first part you’re quite good but the following through bit, isn’t it?

Paul Boag:
I am having to follow through with this University of Strathclyde thing, it’s quite a shock to my system. I’ve never worked so hard last couple of days.

Marcus Lillington:
So what are the other comments, shall I read some?

Paul Boag:
Yes, go on. So you can read some of the negative ones that’ll make you happy.

Marcus Lillington:
They are not negative, they just disagree.

Paul Boag:
Well they are negative then, aren’t they? They disagree with me, therefore they are wrong. And cynical and miserable.

Marcus Lillington:
Right. Adam says, without sign-off complex changes might be requested by management or what could be worse is that the design is simply never finished especially if nobody agrees with the finished design. Yes.

Paul Boag:
Weak argument.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
I am dismissing you, Adam.

Marcus Lillington:
Design – stop.

Paul Boag:
They love it when I insult them.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, that’s right, yes. Of course they do. This is Tim. Tim sounds very nice, design sign-off doesn’t guarantee no changes but I’ve found that the stakeholder will engage and give more consideration to a project when they have to put their name against it. That’s an interesting one.

Paul Boag:
I think it’s a good argument as well. I have trouble disagreeing with that one.

Marcus Lillington:
And focuses the mind and all that kind of thing.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Just sort of dithering about. I didn’t think of that one.

Paul Boag:
Yes, damn you Tim for coming up with a good argument.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, well I’ve always said that it’s the same with deadlines isn’t it?

Paul Boag: Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
We’ve got to get this done by next Wednesday but actually it gets it done.

Paul Boag: Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
It’s like the same thing applies yes, we have to get this signed off by the next week then everyone works hard to make the right decision.

Paul Boag:
Yes. And I love Kev’s as well. It’s amazing how clients are willing to draw a line under pedantic changes if you make them aware that they have exhausted their allocation of iterations and that further work at this stage will incur extra cost and have an impact on deadlines. So in other words people stop complaining when they have to pay money for it. But then we don’t have a set number of allocations.

Marcus Lillington:
No, we don’t.

Paul Boag:
Not allocation. Set number of allocations, what the hell is that?

Marcus Lillington:
Iteration.

Paul Boag:
Iterations.

Marcus Lillington:
No, we don’t, but we still – we will still push for agreement, because you know if you just kind of fizzles on then, you know…

Paul Boag:
Then the project slips.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly.

Paul Boag:
So it might not be money but it’s time.

Marcus Lillington:
And affects other projects and things like that. So we don’t specifically say you get three versions of this because I disagree strongly with that mainly because it makes people think oh I’ve got three goes at this, I’ll have three goes, when it might be perfect first time.

Paul Boag:
Yes, absolutely. Yes, good point. I like that.

Marcus Lillington:
All right. Kean: sign-off for me is to filter indecisive clients who without sign-off would happily allow web designers – you taking the mick out my pronunciation.

Paul Boag:
No, I was coughing.

Marcus Lillington:
Right.

Paul Boag:
I got a cough.

Marcus Lillington:
I’ve got bit a coldy.

Paul Boag:
Don’t start.

Marcus Lillington:
No, I am.

Paul Boag:
Keen now has been is cut off. He had his moment to shine and convince us and you’ve gone off on a tangent.

Marcus Lillington:
I’ll start again from the top. Here we go. Sign-off for me is to filter out indecisive clients who without sign-off would happily allow a web designer to begin without being 100% decided on basic decisions such as layout, logos, or color scheme.

Paul Boag:
Yes, you didn’t make – you didn’t shine, Kean. Sorry.

Marcus Lillington:
And on the fence…

Paul Boag:
I like – this is quite a good one. Go on, Adrian, we’ll finish with Adrian. Adrian, you can have the last word mate.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay. In bigger or more well structured organizations, I feel you can definitely push to go down the iterative, evolutionary design in the browser route. If you’re the kind of company that is more regularly dealing with brochure sites, small businesses or busy one man army – sorry, struggling to read this – entrepreneurs, bootstrapping a business for themselves, then I think you’re more likely to run into the kind of people who just want you to get the job done and prefer a design sign-off as well as a cheap price tag. So yeah, that’s what we’ve kind of been saying.

Paul Boag:
Yes, that kind of sums it – it was Adrian’s comment that made me realize well actually all the people that were in favor of this are bigger organizations. So yeah, if you’re big, then you can faff around. If you’re small, then you need to get design sign-off.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, it comes back to my original point. It’s about budget really.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Really that’s what it’s about.

Paul Boag:
Damn you for being right. I hate it when you do that. Stop it immediately. I think on that – we need to move on quickly onto a subject where hopefully you will be wrong.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay.

Paul Boag:
And we’re talking about ethics, so you’re bound to be wrong on that being completely unethical as you are.

Marcus Lillington:
I’m not unethical. Right, we are going to have to carry this on after the…

Paul Boag:
The doodley bit.

Where is the ethical line for web designers?

This house proposes that web designers should refuse to do work they consider unethical.

Have your say!

What do you mean you’re not unethical? You’re a salesman, Marcus. Of course you’re unethical. It goes with the territory, doesn’t it?

Marcus Lillington:
What does that mean?

Paul Boag:
Well all sales people are dodgy wheeler-dealer types, aren’t they?

Marcus Lillington:
You’re a salesman.

Paul Boag:
No, I am not.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, you bloody are.

Paul Boag:
I am a marketeer and they are much better. Oh God, what have I become?

Marcus Lillington:
A salesman.

Paul Boag:
Do you know I really remember that right at the end of when we were working for the dotcom before we moved to Headscape, Pete who is now our project manager suggested that actually instead of leading the design team as I was I should do more sales stuff and I was horrified. And it was like no way am I doing that and look at me now. Sad isn’t it really?

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t think generally I am unethical person. I really don’t. I mean I don’t know. It’s a really tough one, isn’t it, because you can go down to the point of well we should all be vegans and we should all ride bicycles and et cetera. So from that point of view, I guess I am not. I take plane flights; I drive around in a big German car. There are certian luxurious that I enjoy I suppose. But I think generally that I like to think that I am a reasonably ethical person. So I am interested to see what this argument is all about.

Paul Boag:
So it feels like he protests too much. That was a very long speech about how you’re not unethical.

Marcus Lillington:
He protested too much.

Paul Boag:
Indeed. Right, so this is – the wording of this is quite important I think. This house proposes that web designers should refuse to do work they consider unethical.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay.

Paul Boag:
All right?

Marcus Lillington:
So if you’re completely unethical you can do what you like.

Paul Boag:
Exactly. Because otherwise you get into this big argument about what’s ethical and what isn’t.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
So it’s more of should you actually do something that you are intrinsically uncomfortable with. And I think that’s quite interesting and it has got into such a good conversation in the comments. I’ve got stack loads of stuff to go through. So before talking about what we think, I think let’s dive into some people that have written stuff. And I’m going to immediately turn this – it’s somebody who decided to pick on me in this conversation.

So this is from Chris. He said I think in your case, Paul, the case is clear. You have been open about the fact that you’re a Christian so the answer has to always be a resounding no, I will not do things that are unethical. Some could argue that you have a responsibility to your employees to ensure that work comes in. Yes, agreed and that I shouldn’t be turning it away but you also have a responsibility to those using the sites you build and they are far more numerous than your staff. Finally as a boss, you cannot ask your staff to do something you are not willing to do yourself.

Marcus Lillington:
Well, you can.

Paul Boag:
Yes, you can.

Marcus Lillington:
You might choose not to, but you can.

Paul Boag:
So I don’t know whether I entirely agree with that. Difficult one. One – yes, the last point – finally as a boss you cannot ask somebody to do something you’re not willing to do yourself – I don’t know whether I agree with that. So let’s say, for example, I bet there would be a situation – let’s say we were asked to design – this is going to be so controversial and we’ll wind Marcus up to no extent, but I am picking it on purpose. Let’s say we were asked to build a website for the scientologists, right?

Marcus Lillington:
Right.

Paul Boag:
Now you would – I am putting words in your mouth, Marcus, but correct me if I am wrong – you would just think that’s vaguely funny but I’ll take their money.

Marcus Lillington:
Not a chance; wouldn’t work for them in a million years.

Paul Boag:
Would you not?

Marcus Lillington:
No.

Paul Boag:
Okay, that’s a bad example then. Okay. Let’s pick a more mainstream religion. Jehovah’s Witnesses, would you work for them?

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t think I’d be involved in the project, but I don’t think I would necessarily say no if it was the right kind of brief et cetera, et cetera.

Paul Boag:
Yes, I guess that’s kind of my point is that there are some projects that I personally would be a bit uncomfortable with, but some of my staff would be quite happy to work on. And so – and also there is another consideration. Perhaps if you are a sole web design this is slightly different but you know in our case at Headscape, you and me we have different views of the world and different things that we would be consider ethical or not ethical. But I wouldn’t insist that we didn’t do some piece of work that I found unethical if you were comfortable with it because we’re not running a Christian company, we’re running a company. Do you know what I mean?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
So actually I think there is a case to be argued for, it’s okay for your staff to do something you wouldn’t be willing to do yourself presuming that they are happy doing it.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. I’m interested to think of a – what kind of site…

Paul Boag:
Yes, I was struggling with that.

Marcus Lillington:
…would a Christian not want to do that an atheist would want to do? I can’t – I am struggling with that.

Paul Boag:
Well I think it depends what type of Christian you are, doesn’t it?

Marcus Lillington:
Right.

Paul Boag:
I mean there would be some Christians that would be deeply unhappy with working on a gay marriage website while I wouldn’t have a problem with that.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay, fair enough.

Paul Boag:
I think, yeah, it would be that kind of thing. I am struggling to think of an example myself.

Marcus Lillington:
I mean yeah, this is dangerous ground, isn’t it. And I’m just going to shut up.

Paul Boag:
No, I don’t think it is. I think you can have a – we had a very mature discussion about gender. So why not religion? Hell, you know I don’t think it needs to be a problem area. It is quite interesting, mind, because everybody – ethics isn’t – it’s probably a bad one to start with really because you immediately associated it with religion.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
And actually ethics have got nothing to do with religion.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, well that’s what I was going to kind of say in a very throw away kind of way so I won’t do it in a throw away kind of way but yes.

Paul Boag:
Everybody has ethics.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Things that they consider right and wrong.

Marcus Lillington:
And just because you believe in something, some kind of religion, that doesn’t mean to say that you are automatically an ethical person.

Paul Boag:
Oh, yeah. No, absolutely no.

Marcus Lillington:
And therefore I think we should move onto a different.

Paul Boag:
Well actually David picks it up well, kind of moves it on. He talks about ethics smethics. Your only ethical responsibility is that we as business entities have to make a profit for our companies and shareholders. This isn’t to say we shouldn’t take into account ethical concerns that people hold, but we should do this through the lens of what is good for our business.

And he uses – this is quite interesting; I’ll be interested to see whether you agree with this. For example, personally I find the BNP, which is a kind of a right wing political party in the UK that says a lot about yeah, immigration and that kind of stuff. Personally he finds the BNP morally repugnant but if you approached me to redesign their website, I wouldn’t turn it down on moral grounds. I would however turn it down because of the reputational and long-term financial damage it would cause to my brand.

Marcus Lillington:
I’d turn it down. I’d just say no, but then that’s… I think we’re slowly getting to the nub of this: this comes down to how much you need the work.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Because I’d just – the BNP, God, no. I mean and to be honest to go back to your previous Jehovah’s Witness one, I wouldn’t want to do that either.

Paul Boag:
Right. Well you’re kind of – you’re not a great fan of any religious group.

Marcus Lillington:
No, no. That’s not true.

Paul Boag:
Oh, I’ve thought of one we might disagree with. Here we go. I would struggle to work on Richard Dawkins’ website because I think he is a giant dick. But I am imagining you would quite happily do that.

Marcus Lillington:
No problem at all.

Paul Boag:
Yeah. So there is an example of it. That I find his views quite offensive and demeaning to people that have religious views, while you probably agree with most of him and so that would be an example of one where we would disagree, but I wouldn’t insist on us turning that project away as Headscape, because I know you would be comfortable with it and that many, many people in the company would be comfortable with it, but I would prefer not to work on it.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. Well I was kind of making that point earlier about something else and I can’t remember what it was.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
But yes, I mean the example that David gave about you’ve got to be very careful about what you take on because of the way…

Paul Boag:
Reputation.

Marcus Lillington:
Yeah, future reputation. But if it comes down to whether you want to take something on because you need to feed your kids, oh, well that’s when we get into the real nub of this I think.

Paul Boag:
Yes. And Benjamin talks about I think it’s difficult in this day and age to be completely ethical in all your practices while earning enough money to support yourselves and your family. As a designer, it’s up to you to convince clients. So he is saying, yes, you end up doing unethical stuff, you know all the stuff that you’re uncomfortable with, which I think it depends on what you’re talking about here. We’ve focused very much on different types of clients. And David is focusing on the reputational effect that has.

For example, we had a big debate, didn’t we, about whether to take on Lovehoney. And Lovehoney produce, sells sex toys and that kind of thing. And in the end we decided we would do, because we didn’t see a problem with it but we weren’t considering not taking on Lovehoney because they produce sex toys and those are dirty. We were wondering what the reputational effect of that was, whether there would be a stigma attached to it that would damage us as a brand.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
But I think Benjamin, he then gets into kind of other areas which are quite interesting which is – which I think was in my head when I talked about unethical behavior which isn’t about the type of client or the product or whatever else, but is things that they ask you to do on sites.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
So for example, he goes on to talk about Dark Patterns. He says as designers it is up to us to convince our clients that best practices are followed. And if you end up implementing a Dark Pattern – now a Dark Pattern might include something like you know those tricks that you can use to – where you have a checkbox where you say things, use double negatives.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Uncheck this box if you would like to receive information on…

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
You know, it’s that kind of thing. If you end up implementing a Dark Pattern or feature that it will piss off users and you fail to do your job if you can’t convince them of that. If they – it’s our job to try and convince them of that kind of stuff. So I think that’s quite interesting. Dark Patterns are an interesting one because we’ve become very slick as a profession over those kinds of marketing and psychological tricks to make people do what you want. And where is the line in that?

You know if I put an image on a website of a person, I know that a user will automatically look at it. So I’ve manipulated a user into looking at something I want them to look at. Is that wrong? No, I don’t think it is. But is it wrong to have a situation where you start automatically sending emails out to people without specifically asking their permission or having a tiny little hidden link that someone might miss that says I am going to tweet to all your followers. You know somewhere in between all of that, there is a line, isn’t there?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. But there is advertising and there is manipulation.

Paul Boag:
Yes. But in terms of kind of put your food on the table, Ant says something: while you may be leaving money on the table in the short-term, in the long-term if your business becomes associated with underhand tactics on the web your reputation as a business and as a professional will suffer possibly beyond being repaired.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
So other people are going to look at the work you’ve done basically which is a big part of it. P. Mort says something quite interesting. This kind of goes back to the more general issues of would you work with the BNP. If you can’t make a stand as a human being against requests you perceive as unethical then you have made yourself a name as somebody who is willing to do what is unethical.

Marcus Lillington:
Yeah because that’s all you would ever do.

Paul Boag:
Yeah, you’d just end up always doing unethical stuff which is quite a depressing…So, I mean, classic example of that is designing pornography sites. Basically, you can make an incredibly good living making pornography sites. You can get paid top dollar to do that kind of work, but if you start doing that work you need to be aware that is all you will ever build; that you will ghettoize yourselves. And you know I am not making any judgments about whether that is right or wrong but you need to be aware of what you’re doing before you go into it. Shall we have a look at some of the on-the-fence ones?

Marcus Lillington:
Oh, I hadn’t gone down that far.

Paul Boag:
Yeah, there’s loads.

Marcus Lillington:
God, yeah.

Paul Boag:
You really – we’re not going to be able to cover all of these so please go and check out the show notes and follow through to the comments because there is some really great stuff. Let’s have a look at David. How do you deem what is unethical? Would you refuse to work for a car showroom because of the carbon emissions that some people find unethical? And this goes back to the wording of the question where I say “should refuse to do work you consider or they consider unethical.”

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly, I mean that’s what I was squirming at the start about being ethical or am I. Am I ethical or unethical. Yes, I mean exactly I wouldn’t have a problem working for Audi, say.

Paul Boag:
No, I could quite enjoy that.

Marcus Lillington:
That would be a nice site to design. But yeah, once again it’s where do you draw the line.

Paul Boag:
Yeah and Andy follows it up. Take for example gay pride. You know I personally wouldn’t have an issue with that but – nor any other type of equality charity – but some people may and it wouldn’t pass their ethical gate. It’s down to that person or that company themselves to make a decision over that. And I would agree with that.

Pam says if you work as I do in the trenches as an employee within a studio or agency, it’s very unlikely that you would have the authority to refuse to work on a project or turn down a client’s request because you find it question – ethically questionable. You could raise an objection with your boss but ultimately you are not the decision maker which leaves three options: quietly get on with it despite your reservations, quit your job or try to persuade the client with reasoned fact-based arguments that what they are proposing isn’t ethically sound and may alienate users.

I agree with those options, but to imply that you’ve got no control over it is wrong. I think you can raise an objection. And my members of staff regularly do, you know, at Headscape. They go oh, that’s a terrible idea. And I think if one of them turned round to me and said I feel really uncomfortable working on this Christian site because I think you’re all a load of nutters then I would respect that and I would try and avoid them working on that particular site.

Marcus Lillington:
Just to go maybe to play devil’s advocate a bit on that. It’s if you’re working on a site – in Pam’s situation, you are an employee and you are one of a team of designers and your project is fine. It’s all good, it’s all good. It’s not a company that you would be – you’d view as unethical, but there is one thing in there, where they are saying…

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
I can’t think of a good example, but it’s just one thing that everyone else thinks is a bit…

Paul Boag:
A Dark Pattern.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. Something like that rather than it all being a bit oh, this is dodgy.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, should you stand out? That’s actually the kind of example that we should be…

Paul Boag:
Yes, focusing on because that’s – yes, that’s a more – because it’s not as black and white.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly and then if you go back to this house proposes that web designers should refuse to do work they consider unethical when it’s an example like that, then that’s when it’s like oh, I am not sure.

Paul Boag:
Yes. I take the view – my view on that one, what I’d personally do, is I will tell a client once, I will lay out my argument as clearly as I can, why I think this is a bad idea and then it’s their decision. Because you don’t – yes, you have an obligation to defend the user from being spammed by tweets that they didn’t agree to or whatever the Dark Pattern is. Yes, you have a responsibility to put the argument but ultimately your contractual arrangement that you’ve entered into is with your client. And that you have said that you would deliver a solution to them. So in that kind of situation, I will state what I believe is the right thing for the client to do and what I believe is right ethically but I will pretty much go with the flow presuming they are not suggesting anything that is illegal.

So if they wanted to break data protection for example then I may well refuse to, but if they just want to implement a Dark Pattern, if they reject my arguments, I think I would go on and do it for them.

Marcus Lillington:
Which means you disagree with the house?

Paul Boag:
Yes, I guess I do. Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Tricky. It depends what you mean by unethical at the end of the day. Well no, it doesn’t. We’ve kind of got to the nub of this. It isn’t – yes, I mean the example we’ve just done there is something that you the designer thinks is unethical but you’ve given them the choice and if they turn around and say well, no, do it whatever, we are the boss we are paying you.

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
Then you do it anyway. You don’t refuse.

Paul Boag:
Yes. I think I would do. I think not with something that breaks the law but if I’ve taken – for me I think the big thing is if I have taken on the job of designing the website and if I’ve signed a contract and if I – which is effectively a promise to the client, then my ethical radar, for want of a better word – meter, however you put it, would rate that higher then I would feel more unethical breaking that relationship with the client, then I would implementing a Dark Pattern.

Marcus Lillington:
I actually disagree with you personally on this. I think that you are a senior enough person that owns his own business that you would refuse to do it but…

Paul Boag:
What even with a client that we’ve got an agreement with?

Marcus Lillington:
I think to a certain extent, without a real example it’s really hard to…

Paul Boag:
Yes, I can’t think of an example where I haven’t.

Marcus Lillington:
I think you would not back down, I think is a better way of putting it.

Paul Boag:
Well I can think of an example where we did exactly that with Aster Development. So Aster Development wanted to…

Marcus Lillington:
But I wouldn’t say that’s unethical.

Paul Boag:
Well let me explain what it is.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, okay.

Paul Boag:
For the listener.

Marcus Lillington:
Yeah, okay. Oh, do you have to?

Paul Boag:
Which basically went – yes, I’m not convinced it is either now I say it but I need to explain anyway. They asked us to essentially force users to register for their – to view a demo of their product. No, that’s not unethical, is it? It’s just stupid.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes, exactly. That’s my point. It’s kind of like that’s their sales decision, we disagreed with it but yes, fair enough.

Paul Boag:
No, alright, I can think of another example more recently which is Butterfly, the Butterfly Conservation website. They’ve got a horribly complicated form where you have to opt out of certain things so that they don’t spam you. And I tried to persuade them that was a bad idea. They pretty much said no, we’re going to go with it as it is, keep it the way it is and I backed down and let them have that.

Marcus Lillington:
Okay. Alright.

Paul Boag:
So there we go.

Marcus Lillington:
I’m wrong about you, Paul. I thought you were more manly than that obviously.

Paul Boag:
No, I just think that ultimately it’s their website. It’s not my website. And so if they – you know, unless they are asking me to do something illegal – I’ll try hard, I’ll battle my corner. I guess also it depends on how strongly I feel about it.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly.

Paul Boag:
Some things you feel more strongly about than other. But just going back to Pam’s thing just for a minute, if there is something bigger that you feel is unethical. You know, if somebody came to – one of my employees came to me and said I really don’t want to work on that site. I would say fine, we’ll put you on something else. If a boss wouldn’t do that, I’d have to seriously consider whether I want to be working in that company if they cared so little about my feelings. Wouldn’t you say?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. But I think sometimes we live in a quite a pleasant world and don’t necessarily…

Paul Boag:
We don’t live with a cold harsh reality of working life.

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t know. I think we have a very stressful existence but it’s based on – I don’t know, I think we’ve always been a fairly ethical company, fair, hopefully – we want people to want to work for us and…

Paul Boag:
Yes.

Marcus Lillington:
…things like that but I don’t think…

Paul Boag:
But not everybody does.

Marcus Lillington:
I don’t think everybody is like that.

Paul Boag:
No. I’m just such a nice guy is what it comes down.

Marcus Lillington:
That’s what it comes down to, Paul.

Paul Boag:
Yes, and you. I’ll include you in that. We are such a nice people.

Marcus Lillington:
Very, very nice indeed.

Paul Boag:
Very nice.

Marcus Lillington:
And we’ve gone on for bloomin’ ages.

Paul Boag:
Have we really? We ought to finish this show then, hadn’t we really?

Marcus Lillington:
Yes.

Paul Boag:
Okay. It’s got dark outside while we’ve been recording this so it probably is time to finish, isn’t it? Okay. So have you got a joke for us to wrap up because there has been very little in the way of humor in this show; it’s all been quite serious.

Marcus Lillington:
Indeed. But that probably means it’s a good one.

Paul Boag:
Yes, probably.

Marcus Lillington:
Yes. A joke from Wizard who sends me many jokes. I like this one. A musician who joined an orchestra on a cruise ship was having a terrible time keeping time with the rest of the band. Finally the band leader said, look, either you learn to keep time or I’ll throw you over board. It’s up to you, sync or swim.

Paul Boag:
I don’t get that.

Marcus Lillington:
Don’t you?

Paul Boag:
Sink or swim?

Marcus Lillington:
Synchronize or swim. SYNC or… It wasn’t a very good one then, was it?

Paul Boag:
Well look, either it wasn’t a very good one or I am really thick. It could easily be either. Write in and tell us. Yes, no, I think it’s probably just me being thick.

Marcus Lillington:
I’ve got another wonderful base – oh, no, I’ve just given it away. Damn. I’ve got another musician joke.

Paul Boag:
Keep it for another day because we’ll have forgotten by then.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly. Yes.

Paul Boag:
Alright then. Well thank you very much for listening to this show. I hope you’re enjoying the debates because I think it’s quite interesting. I quite like it as a format.

Marcus Lillington:
Exactly.

Paul Boag:
So, look, if you’ve got any other ideas for other subjects please keep them coming in because I really do struggle to come up with ideas. So any suggestions are much appreciated. Otherwise we’ll talk to you again next week.

Marcus Lillington:
Cheers. Bye.

Paul Boag:
Bye.

Headscape

Boagworld