CSS Trickster Chris Coyier

Chris Coyer is best know for his work on CSS-Tricks a ever growing web design community. However, as you will discover in this interview it isn’t just limited to CSS.

Paul: Joining me today is Chris Coyier. Good to have you on the show, Chris.

Chris: It’s good to be here. Long time listener, first time caller, as it were.

Paul: And vice versa. I’ve really enjoyed the stuff you put out, and it helps me pretend that I’m still a web designer when I’m not, really.

Chris: Thanks.

Paul: I think that’s a compliment. I’m not quite sure. You do some really cool stuff. But just in case people haven’t heard about you, tell us a little bit about yourself, your background, and the kind of stuff you’re up to.

Chris: Sure, my 2-second background is that I started out in print design after college, and then realized the web is where it’s at and what I wanted to get into. I ended up convincing a small design company to hire me. It was trial by fire, super-quick, better learn the web. About that same time, I’m like, I’m learning so much, maybe I’ll write it down and blog about it. That was the birth of CSS-Tricks. If anybody knows me, it’s generally because of that. It ended up over the years becoming more popular than my wildest dreams, as it were.

Chris Coyier

Paul: It’s amazingly popular, isn’t it? You have a huge following on Twitter, and you’ve got some brilliant content there. How did that come about? Just because you were trying to record what you were learning?

Chris: That’s how it started. What it evolved into… Well, maybe it’s not too far away from where it started. If there’s some web anything that’s particularly interesting to me at the time, I write about it. If I don’t have time to write about it, I make a list. Quite literally make a list, and then go back and write about it later. So, it’s very personal to me. It’s not really a group blog, it’s just my blog.

Paul: In some ways, it’s very similar to Boagworld, because that’s how we started…

Chris: Very similar.

Paul: It’s primarily me. Increasingly, there’s other people involved with it, but you have a forum, you have articles, you have screencasts. You’ve got some really cool stuff on there. You give away loads of freebie stuff, you’ve got snippets and things going on. It’s a real wealth of activity.

Chris: Yeah, I call it a web design community up top, because it incorporates forums. I’m proud of the comment threads that happen, because they’re usually above and beyond the intelligence level I find in other random blogs. I’m not naming any names. I don’t really care, but I have some smart people that write comments here. That’s fabulous.

Paul: It’s disturbing when your commenters are smarter than you are. That always upsets me.

Chris: (laughs) I like that part.

Paul: Okay, I just don’t like to be the thickey in the class. Sometimes you just need to accept it. The other thing that really strikes me about CSS-Tricks is that it’s not just about CSS, is it?

Chris: Oh, no. It’s quite unfortunately named, isn’t it? It’s been a long time, and I don’t know, maybe the right thing to do would be to start adjusting its branding. But then, it’s just throwing away so much branding work to rename a site like that. I just decided to not care. I make it clear that this is about the web, not about CSS. CSS is still my favorite language, but I don’t write exclusively about CSS. Once in a while, I get somebody who’s just… Just last week, I got a guy who was really quite mad at me for writing about things other than CSS. It was a JQuery article.

Paul: Well, that’s as good as CSS, pretty much, isn’t it? It couldn’t be much more like it.

Chris: It’s got selectors!

Paul: Exactly, that’s got to count, I think. So, how long has CSS-Tricks been going now?

Chris: I guess it’s third birthday would be the Fourth of July of this year. So it was 2007 when it started. Three years, which is not a long time compared to some of the other folks in the industry. Even you, probably, I’m sure.

Paul: Yeah. We’ve been going for a lot longer. It just shows how incredibly popular the site is. It’s grown so quickly in such a short length of time. That’s brilliant. So, after saying that CSS-Tricks isn’t all about CSS, I want to talk about CSS, if that’s alright.

Chris: (laughs) Yeah, absolutely. It’s my favorite.

Paul: Obviously, there’s been loads of talk at the moment about CSS3, and I’m really interested… You’re obviously a guy that really keeps up-to-date on what’s going on at the moment. What is it that excites you the most about the CSS3 specification, if you can get excited about specification?

Chris: Oh, you can!

Paul: Oh, okay! Perhaps you’ve got to be a certain type of person.

Chris: (laughs) A nerd? Is that what you’re saying?

Paul: I’m not making any comments at all. So what is it that excites you, then?

Chris: Oh, I guess the whole bucket. The big conversation is "Can I start using it now?" That’s the classic thing. And of course, the classic answer to that is "Yes, absolutely. Progressive enhancement and all that…" That should be echoed here, as long as we’re talking about it.

Paul: Absolutely.

Chris: Everybody is absolutely dead-on about that. And the quintessential example is that the corners are rounded in Webkit, but they’re square in IE. And who cares? That’s a really good example. There are all these things we can do to improve the look of our websites in that way.

Paul: It’s really funny, because I’m working on a site at the moment, and I’ve literally just today been explaining that to a client, that your rounded corners and drop-shadows aren’t going to appear in IE. And actually, they quite like that, because…

Chris: Do they?

Paul: Yes! The reason they like it is that they perceive the IE audience as being much more conservative and wanting something much simpler in this particular case. So they like the fact that you can give something a little bit more to those who have fancier browsers and keep it nice and simple for those who are still using IE. I think it’s quite an interesting perspective on it, really.

Chris: That’s pretty amazing for a client. You probably have spectacularly good clients.

Paul: He is a very good client, a very knowledgeable client. I like those.

Chris: Good. I’m interested in how you approached it. How did you sell it to this guy? Was it your amazingly good personality that pushed him that way?

Paul: (laughs) Yes, it’s my wonderful personality! That’s one of the advantages of blogging quite a lot. A lot of clients follow my blog, so they’ve learned about this stuff over time. They’ve wrapped their heads around progressive enhancement because of various articles, and so there wasn’t alot of selling to do. Basically, I showed him what it looks like in Safari and got all excited about that. Then I showed him that in IE, it’s going to look a bit simpler. In fact, I think I said it to him first, and he said "Oh, I need to see that." Then I showed him, and because it still looked neat and tidy and looked really nice still, he was fine with it. I only use CSS3 for those little extras, rather than the main stuff.

Chris: Well, there’s very little of it that isn’t just little extras, so that’s what’s kind of cool. When you talk CSS3, generally, it’s just extras. Animations and corners and transitions and all that.

Paul: Have you been doing much with the animations and transitions? I’ve done the corners and the drop-shadowey stuff and that kind of thing, but I haven’t done much with that kind of stuff, animations and transitions.

Chris: Just in that, I think I get it now. But not really, especially on a live site. No, I haven’t rolled anything out for a client. I’ve done enough that I’ve got this figured out. I can do a little nudge, and I can replicate some JQuery or JavaScript library-type of animations with it. But a couple of weeks ago, Andy Clark posted a link on Flickr of an example of what he’s going to be using for his new book that was killer. You resize the browser window, and it would 3D animate this cover of a book. It’s very hard for me to describe with words here, but I was jaw-dropped. I thought it’s about time for me to start looking into this.

Paul: It sounds really good. It’s interesting, isn’t it? If you’re going to be nerdy, as we said earlier, how much of this stuff actually should be in JavaScript rather than CSS? Is it not more behavior stuff than design? I don’t know.

Chris: I don’t think so at all. I think it’s design. When I think of JavaScript and behavior, I think of events, like clicks and double-clicks and stuff like that. That’s JavaScript territory. But if it’s something like rotating something, which is CSS3, that’s very much design to me, not behavior. There’s probably arguments either way, but I really feel like the transitions and the transforms are very much CSS territory. If we could keep that to CSS, that would be ideal.

Paul: I can see that. If you take that logic, then things like :hover in CSS properly should be in JavaScript instead. (laughs)

Chris: Yeah, that’s funny. That’s the one event you get in CSS. Maybe it should be. Oh god, I can’t imagine the outcry if CSS4 removes :hover.

Paul: It does make me a bit twitchy, this kind of animation. I’ve got images of flaming, rotating logos coming back into fashion.

Chris: (laughs) Yeah, certainly, especially because you can do things with transition and transform, like literally make an animation that repeats. You could quite literally make a flaming, infinitely rotating logo.

Paul: Like all these things, it’s what you do with it, more than actually…

Chris: Absolutely. Have you heard arguments from people that say, regarding fonts, (we could do ten podcasts just about that) "now we can use any web font!" And people arguing against that. And "can you imagine the terrible things designers are going to do with that?" That’s not an argument. Removing and imposing restrictions because it might be misused? It’s unacceptable.

Paul: I look back to the early days of desktop publishing when it came along, and it is true that when you first gave the ability to do desktop publishing to anybody and everybody, for a long time, the quality was appalling. There are still appalling examples out there, but it’s equally enabled designers to do incredible things. It’s just the same, isn’t it?

Chris: It really is just the same. All of a sudden, Photoshop has bevel and emboss, so now everything is beveled. It’s the same thing, sure. Same argument. We’ll probably have it again in a few years.

chriscoyier.net

Paul: Yes. With these transitions, you mentioned you can do rotation. What other stuff can you do?

Chris: I guess there’s rotation and sizing, or scaling, I guess you would call it. Gosh, what else is there? I wish I had the specs sitting in front of me.

Paul: That’s always the way, isn’t it? I’ve asked you a question and you haven’t got the answer too instantly.

Chris: (laughs)

Paul: And you call yourself an expert, Chris? (laughs)

Chris: (laughs) No, I wouldn’t on this particular thing. You can declare a color, and then another color, and transform between those two colors. It does an incredibly good job at it too, you know? So, anything that you can think of that you would use the animate function in JQuery to do… You can animate the padding on this element from five pixels to ten pixels, and you can do this in CSS too now. Just declare the regular state as having a padding of five pixels, and the :hover state as having a padding of ten pixels. On the regular state, give it that CSS property of transition, and you can tell it to do a transition on the padding property. And it will do it. I think there’s some CSS properties that it works for, and some that it doesn’t. But quite a few that it does- margin, padding, color, size, scale, rotation.

Paul: That’s really exciting, some of the potential for that. It does always leave you this vague feeling that now I need to wrap my head around what I can do with that that isn’t gimmicky that’s actually cool to do.

Chris: Exactly.

Paul: What’s the kind of support for it, do you know?

Chris: That’s a good question. When I originally started thinking of these… Well, they’re all prefaced by these browser prefixes, so if you want to use it, it’s -webkit-transition and -webkit-transform. Mozilla has them too.

Paul: Oh that’s good.

Chris: They were out, and we were using them as examples when Firefox 3.5 was around, and I think 3.6 is out now, and it works better, so…

Paul: Really?

Chris: Firefox 3.6 brought along a lot of that stuff with it. I think there’s some stuff… I mean, Webkit is absolutely leading the pack. That’s no question. If you want to be playing around with this stuff, it’s all about Chrome and Safari.

Paul: That’s good stuff. That’s interesting if basically you’ve started to use things like rounded corners and drop-shadows, there’s no reason why you can’t be playing around with transitions too, which is good. Excellent. Let’s talk a little bit about how it’s very easy to get caught up in CSS3 and all the cool, new things that you can do. One of the things that really struck me from looking through your own site, CSS-Tricks, was how much you can actually do that’s really done with CSS2 and the kinds of things that are available to us right now, pretty much universally across most browsers. Is there stuff that particularly jumps out at you where you’ve seen sites and think they’re really using CSS in an original way there?

Chris: Yeah. The things I write about, the things that interest me the most, and probably to a wider audience, isn’t just the technology of CSS necessarily, because CSS is a pretty simple language, really. It’s nothing compared to pretty much any other web language you can write in. HTML is also very simple. It’s just a descriptive language, and when you compare that to something like PHP, it just blows my mind. It’s much more complicated. It’s more interesting what people do design-wise, and then get it done with CSS.

Paul: Yes, absolutely.

Chris: And that will never get old. That’s why blogging about web design and tutorial sites like mine really just has an unlimited amount of content that can be written. "Look at this cool site. This is what they did with CSS to make it happen." And that’s just ubiquitously interesting, I think.

Paul: Yes. That’s the thing that attracted me as I was looking through the site. The times where you’ve found something really cool, and then you’ve taken it apart and told us how it was done. I remember seeing one which was… I can’t remember the site. It’s a well-known site where you scroll down and there are robots in the background that change into zombies when you get to the bottom.

Chris: Oh yeah, that was so awesome. It’s that e-commerce site where they have all kinds of awesome stuff to buy.

Paul: I can’t remember.

Chris: Think Geek.

Paul: Think Geek! That was it. It’s such a nice effect, so well thought through. And like you say in your screencast where you talk through it, it’s not that difficult to do. It’s having the imagination to think of the things you can do.

Chris: It’s the idea.

Paul: Are there any other examples like that where you’ve thought "I love that. I wish I had thought of that?"

Chris: Oh sure. When you talk about dissecting someone else’s idea and presenting it, one time I did that was on the date display technique from learningjquery.com. Karl Swedberg. It’s really neat. The way the date looks is really nice on that site. The text is rotated ninety degrees. It’s clearly using a font that isn’t available. I wonder how they did that? It turns out that how they did it was using a single image, using a CSS sprite, which is a technique that’s been around forever and ever. What a simple technique, easily doable with just CSS2. And the idea of a sprite, if there are people listening who don’t know what it is, it’s a single graphic that has lots of little graphics within it. In the case of this date sprite, there was a number for one through thirty-one; and there was January through December; and there was one through twelve for the months. When it needs to display a date, it would show three little boxes on the website, and only show the little region of that large CSS sprite that had those months. So, dynamically, they could still output a date, but it had some programming stuff in the background that showed you just the little bits that you needed to display the date in that cool way. What a simple technique, and what a really cool end result.

Paul: Yes, brilliant. I’ve literally just found the blog post you’ve written about it. Yeah, you would presume that’s using some kind of rotate thing in CSS3, but it’s such a simple little way of doing it. Brilliant. Love it.

Chris: So, the day after that was published, Jonathan Snook wrote a follow-up article that showed exactly that. Yeah, that’s cool, but you can do that in CSS3. It’s a good example of where progressive enhancement can step in.

Paul: Absolutely. The other thing that I wanted to touch on is the fact that in CSS-Tricks, you talk a lot about JQuery as well. I take you’re a massive fan of JQuery.

Chris: Yes, that’s really all it is. When I was first learning JavaScript, I ended up getting a book on JQuery. I had heard a lot about it and heard that a lot of other designers liked it. I read Karl Swedberg’s book, Learning JQuery, pretty much on a plane. I was glued to it. I thought, "This is so cool, it uses CSS selectors." I just started writing and creating my own examples, so it was a pretty organic process of learning. I’m a front-end guy. I’m not much of a programmer, necessarily. Now that I’ve learned JQuery, it’s a little hard for me to… I don’t know much MooTools. I can’t write Prototype. I stick with what I know, so as it turns out, I just got back a few weeks ago from the JQuery conference. I got to meet some of the creators of JQuery and the guys on that team. It was just amazing.

Paul: You’ve just described yourself, you’re a front-end guy. Did you find JQuery easy to pick up?

Chris: Yes, that’s the real strength of it. That for one. I said this in talks before, it’s like choosing the guitar, because if you do a Google search for guitar chords on a certain song, you’ll get a million hits. But if you look up "banjo tab," you’ll get a lot fewer hits. It’s like that with JQuery and JQuery libraries. There’s just so much more out there for JQuery. The community is bigger. It’s easier to find support for it. It’s easier to find beginner tutorials for it. It’s a good choice that way. Also, maybe I’m a little biased, maybe not the best guy to ask about this thing, but it may be the best one, too. The brains behind it. And the continuing development is so strong that I have a good feeling that it’s the best one.

Paul: Yes, and it looks like it’s got a dedicated team really working to develop it long-term. It doesn’t look like it’s going away anytime soon. And from a designer’s point of view, it’s such a pleasure to work with. Because as we said earlier, it’s like using CSS. It’s beautiful.

Chris: It reads like the English language. Target a div with a class of thing and hide it. If you’ve never seen JavaScript in your life, but you did have a little bit of CSS knowledge, you could read that sentence and see that clearly they’re hiding that div. There’s no doubt about it.

Paul: It’s great as well for picking up on other people’s code. If you work as a team, which obviously we do at Headscape, so that works well.

Chris: You guys use it at Headscape?

Paul: Oh yes. We use it all the time. It’s quick as well, is the other thing I love about it. You can turn stuff around so quickly with it, in comparison to writing JavaScript from the ground up. There’s very little reason not to. I do think it’s good to have an understanding of, a good grasp on JavaScript before you start relying on something like JQuery, but you know…

Chris: That’s a whole conversation to itself.

Paul: That would start a good, old argument. We had Dustin Diaz on the podcast recently, who is now working at Twitter, and he…

Chris: Oh really? Is he?

Paul: Yes, and he was brewing JQuery, but I think mainly, simply because of the size and scale they’ve reached, it’s not a problem I think most of us will ever have.

Chris: Really? Is that one released yet? I guess…

Paul: It will be by the time this one goes out. It’s going out next week, as of the time we’re recording this. It’s very confusing, isn’t it?

Chris: I look forward to it. It’s very rare that you hear someone on any other side of JQuery other than gushing…

Paul: He’s not… He’s very pragmatic about it, I think he quite likes JQuery, and he’s not criticizing it. He’s just saying that it’s reached its limitations for them, which is entirely understandable, I guess.

Chris: Absolutely.

Paul: Talking of controversial subjects, I want to pick your brain over this subject of Flash versus CSS and HTML. Increasingly, there are people saying that you don’t really need Flash much these days. CSS and HTML can do most of the stuff you want to do, especially now with HTML5, native video support and that kind of thing. What’s your take on Flash? As a front-end designer, is it technology you use very much? Do you think it’s going away? What’s your opinion?

Chris: It’s just another huge bag of monkeys.

Paul: (laughs) That’s why I brought it up!

Chris: I think there’s big ad agencies out there… My roommate works at an ad agency, and Sprint is one of their clients. A huge, huge client here in the States to have. They have a whole team of Flash developers. They’re really good at Flash. They make Flash-based sites, and it’s not unusual. There are a lot of people out there who are really good at Flash, that’s what their training was in, and they’re going to keep writing Flash. It has such a huge… It’s on something like 98% of browsers. It’s going to be around for a long time. However, with all this controversy and stuff happening right now and how it’s not available on the iPad or iPhone… According to Steve Jobs’ comments, it’s not going to be any time soon. If you’re brand new or going to school or maybe just learning on the side, development, specifically mobile device development, are you going to pick Flash today? Probably not. That’s my opinion on it. As they get older and better and start entering the workforce, they’re not going to be using Flash. They’re going to be using these new technologies, hence the long death of Flash.

CSS-Tricks

Paul: So you do think there will be a long death of it. You don’t think that this is a blip we’re seeing at the moment?

Chris: No, I think long, as in long, long. Five years. Ten years. I agree, though. I’m on the anti-Flash side, to be clear. I guess I didn’t sound pro-Flash, but…

Paul: If you run a website called CSS-Tricks, we’re going to presume that you’re not very excited about Flash.

Chris: And one of the reasons is that I just don’t know it, so I don’t write about it.

Paul: Did you ever know it? Was it a technology you used to use back in the day?

Chris: I did. In college, actually, it’s almost all we did. Pretty much when I got my degree, which is a Bachelor of Arts in Multimedia Communications, that’s all we did. We used Macromedia Flash, it was at the time, and we also used Director, which is like Flash, also frame-based. But I was never particularly good at it. You get your degree in it, and you made three sites that were for fake clients and ultimately garbage. It’s not like I ever really embraced the Flash thing.

Paul: It’s a sad reflection that when I was at university, they didn’t have multimedia courses, because there was no such thing as multimedia. (laughs)

Chris: (laughs) What about Headscape? Do you guys touch it in any way?

Paul: Yes, we do use it occasionally, mainly for video-related stuff. We’ve used it for some mapping stuff in the past, which is quite specific kinds of things that don’t work well with Google maps or the clients have specific requirements that are outside of using Google’s license. But no, we don’t use it heavily. We’ve got one guy who knows his way around it pretty well. We keep him with it, is the best way of putting it. I, on the other hand, haven’t got a flipping clue. I gave up at ActionScript 1, as soon as you could stop dragging things around, I lost interest.

Chris: Absolutely. And I feel like the tools available for Flash are still way, way stronger, to sit there and make a frame-based animation of stuff flying around is something cool. At least I don’t know about them yet, a program on your computer you can fire up and create something like that and have the output be HTML5 and JavaScript with canvas. I just don’t think those tools are around yet.

Paul: No. So, just to wrap this up as we come to the end, I’m quite interested in you, really, and your career and CSS-Tricks. How do you see that? You said it started off as very much a way of documenting your thoughts, but obviously it’s grown to be a lot more than that. Is it a personal brand tool for you? Is it a winning-work tool? How do you use it? You must sink a huge number of hours into it.

Chris: Yes, it’s maybe less than you might think. I get emails from people saying "how do you possibly manage your time and do all the stuff that you do?" I don’t have any crazy "I use Getting Things Done." I don’t have any super secrets to it. I just work on stuff. And once the site is designed, I fire up WordPress. It’s a WordPress site, of course, and I type a little article, hit publish, and it’s not an all-consuming, ten hours a day thing. I probably do spend a couple of hours, because there are things that need to be done, like approving comments and keeping spam off the forums and stuff like that. But it’s not all-consuming. I keep a full-time job. I’m leaving this job now, so the past three years, like I said, the place where I started. I started CSS-Tricks while I was starting this new job. I’ve been there for a long time. It’s been a great job, but since CSS-Tricks has done well, and since I put out a book about WordPress and that did pretty well, I’ve just been blessed in that way of having projects I’ve done go well. I think I’m going to move on from this job and do my own thing for a little while and let CSS-Tricks support me. That was my plan, to maybe at least take the summer off and bum around. I was looking forward to that. I was approached by Wufoo.com. I told you a little about it before we started here. I might mention that. I’ve been a huge fan of Wufoo. If people don’t know it, it’s an online form-builder, making forms, from simple to extremely complicated and what would take a long time to code. I’ve been a big fan of them for a long time, and anybody who comes to me saying "I’m trying to use a form and need help," I just say to use Wufoo, please. It’s saved me an unbelievable amount of time. I think they were aware that I had become an evangelist for them, in a way, and I got to know them after meeting them at a few conferences. They offered me a job, and I accepted it. I’ll be starting at Wufoo, so that’s going to be a big change in my career that I’m very much looking forward to.

Paul: That’s really interesting. You basically tried to go to a kind of freelance or use CSS-Tricks more as a money-earner for you, and you got snatched up before you had the chance to get going in it.

Chris: Yep, that’s how it was. I was all prepared to say no to jobs. I was going to publicly say that I’m going on my own. I’m not a fan of freelance. I’m not built for that.

Paul: That’s interesting. Why not?

Chris: I find it very stressful, to be honest. I find dealing directly with clients, the emails at all hours, the responsibility of billing and all that stuff to be more than my little head can handle. It’s much easier writing a little article and hitting publish and making no promises.

Paul: The plan was to make money off the back of CSS-Tricks, then.

Chris: And maybe to do another book in my spare time.

Paul: That makes sense. Well, it will be interesting to see what happens then. Wufoo.

Chris: Yeah, I don’t know yet. We’ve talked a little bit. I don’t start until June 8th, but I couldn’t be more excited. They’re such great guys, and the job seems so great.

Paul: Excellent! Well it’s really good to talk to you, Chris! We haven’t had a chance to catch up in the past, and I was keen to get you on the show. Obviously, you’re producing some excellent work out there and sharing stuff that’s really useful to people. I wanted a chance to introduce you to the Boagworld audience. They can go and check out what you’re doing.

Chris: I couldn’t be more honored to be on the show. Like I said, we’ve been fans of each other, I guess, for a while.

Paul: Mutual appreciation. That’s always the way to go.

Chris: Thanks for having me.

Paul: Check out Chris at css-tricks.com, and hopefully we will get you back on the show in the future, Chris, maybe about something more specific next time around. Thanks for coming on!

Chris: Okay.

Thanks goes to Traci Brigham for transcribing this interview.

If you recognise that the mobile web is important and you need help deciding on a strategy, then book a mobile consultancy clinic.

Book a consultancy clinic or contact Rob about a more in-depth review.

I was on net@night

Wow. That was exciting. I got to chat with Leo Laptorte & Amber Mac on one of my favourite shows net@night.

I love net@night. It’s a great show. It’s laid back, informal and talks about all the web stuff that warms my heart.

You can therefore imagine how excited I was to be on the show this week. Both Leo and Amber have been a huge influence on my podcasting and so it was great to talk to them both.

We chatted about web design trends, the boagworld podcast and the website owners manual. It was loads of fun and I hope I get the chance to talk to the guys again in the future.

Kevin Rose on Community

At this years at Future of Web Apps I was fortunate enough to interview Kevin Rose, the founder of digg.com about running online community.

Paul: Ok, so I’m really pleased to have joining me today Kevin Rose from Digg and Diggnation. Good to have you on the show.

Kevin: Thanks for having me.

Paul: So, Kevin we had your keynote this morning at Future of Web Apps, which was brilliant, really enjoyed that, and you talked about some really interesting concepts around the subject of community building and that whole complexity that goes into that, and you made some really good points about how to encourage and engage people in community, and you talked particularly about this idea of massaging egos, which I thought was very interesting. Maybe you could share a little bit about that?

Kevin: Well I just think that people don’t really talk about that side of things, it’s kind of like it’s a black art in some ways. People are like “anything that would stroke the ego is a bad thing, and we shouldn’t do that!” but we’re doing that all the time in the features that we build. And you see it even in the most successful sites out there, I think, have figured a way to inflate an individuals self worth, in a way, when they use their products.

Paul: So you want to give us some examples, perhaps?

Kevin: I think that one of the biggest one is Twitter and the follower count and the idea that when you look at that number it’s “whose is bigger” contest between whoever is playing the game, right. So it could be between a couple of different plumbers, that have competing plumbing companies, they have Twitter accounts, any celebrities that are on there. And that’s just one of just a whole slew of different examples from Farmville, which is a really popular Facebook application, that figure out ways to give you certain awards every time you do different things and give you different badges and levels and things like that. I don’t use it as a way to drive the idea of the feature, so I’m not backing into it saying: “Ok, how can I massage the ego?” I think of, what does the community need? What features are we building? And I want to always make sure that person is rewarded in some form of fashion, and that can either be like, I’m digging a story and this is important to me so I want to show that I’ve added one to the overall count and in my profile it can be something where I achieve a certain level based on my contributions to the system, so I’m leveling up inside of a system. And there are so many ways to go about this.

Paul: One of the ones that you mentioned were leader boards, about how in the early days of Digg you had this leader board and then you decided to remove it. The thing that always strikes me from my experience of working with leader boards is that they can actually be gamed in a negative way, which ends up actually damaging the community. And is that why you removed them from Dig? And how did you get around that problem?

Kevin: Yeah, in the early days it was based on the total amount of stories that reached the front page, the stories that you submitted. And so it became this game that for the first six months was a lot of fun for pretty much everyone on the site, because they would look at the number one slot and say: “Ok that’s something I can achieve if I put in a decent amount and effort and work into trying to play this game.” As they grew hundreds and hundreds of stories deep to where you’d have to have a thousand front page stories, people were having a hard enough time getting one story on the front page of Digg, let alone a thousand. So it would discourage a lot of the other people and all of a sudden we had this press articles about how Dig is controller by very small subset of its user base bla bla bla.. so it was something we decided to remove because there was no real way for anyone to break into it once it hit a certain level. Some of the stuff we’re looking at now, well there is a couple of things: one, we plan on opening up a promotion of stories to a whole slew of different, like an open taxonomy, a whole slew of tags, so if you’re in something very niche, like rock climbing or road bikes, you’ll be able to jump into that section and see stories getting promoted in there. And so it’s not necessarily about just that one home page that sees a hundred and some stories a day, it can be about these other small verticals. And inside of those verticals we want to highlight the users data really finding the quality content. One ways that this can be gamed is if you’re saying: ok it’s only by the people that submit stories. Because some people are, I don’t know if they sleep or not, but they happen to be the first one to go out there and always find the best stories and be the first submitter. So, ways that we can get around this is not look at submissions, but also looking at the people that dug this early on, and how accurate they are at predicting whether something is going to be very popular. So, let’s say you’re in the road bikes section and there may be someone who diggs 50 articles a day, but let’s say you only digg 5 a day, but the ones you always digg eventually become very popular within the ecosystem. That means that you’re a very prescient user, you are a user that is very good at predicting what the community is going to enjoy.

Paul: Quality rather than quantity

Kevin: Exactly, so if we can start to structure our leader boards around those concepts, those are very difficult things to game, because even if you do game them you’re really providing the masses with what they want, high quality content. So, and then also lowering that window, so instead of saying it’s an all-time leader board, something that the sum all of your activities over time that would be hard to penetrate, you can say this is leader board of the best users in the last 30 day, or the best users in the last week or two weeks.

Paul: Constantly resetting

Kevin: Resetting, refreshing always making sure, and there might be some people who stick and some that go on vacation or holiday for a couple of weeks and then all of a sudden they’re back to square one.

Paul: Talking about your users, you talked a little bit about putting content live and then seeing how people responded to that and adjusting accordingly. Do you actually ever do any formal usability testing where you get people in and try stuff out?

Kevin: Absolutely

Paul: Ok, so how do you go about doing that, do you select people from the community or how does it go?

Kevin: We typically do it into three different sets of groups: we’ll have what we call our “lurkers to the site”, so people that are aware of Digg but they don’t participate. So they like the home page and understand what we’re doing we’ll invite them in for some usability testing, and then we’ll invite some peop

le that have no idea what Digg is, they’ve never heard of it before. And then we’ll invite our hard-core, on-Digg-24/7, the big stream users, and we’ll take those three groups of users probably 10-15 per group, set them down in front of a bunch of computers and then just walk them through a bunch of different scenarios.

Paul: One of the kinds of advantages of being a well established brand, whether it be pamps(?) or Digg or whatever else, you can try stuff out and you’ll get a reaction from your community and people will tolerate that backwards and forwards. But if you’re a startup – we just interviewed a guy earlier today who literally is him and his mate and they’re launching a startup – they only get one opportunity to make a good impression, really. So this idea of putting stuff out and testing it do you think that always applies?

Kevin: Yeah I do, I think that if you have just bad ideas and you can’t get a product to where at least people are like “that’s interesting enough to where I want to play with it” then you have to go back to square one. So that initial launch is not proving itself then maybe you need to try a different idea, but for us I think that we’ve been very fortunate in that first initial ideas that we’ve launch with have been sticky enough to have a group of users that wanted to continue using the product, and that’s the point where your starting to get feedback from these users or they’re starting to ask you “I’m having a bug or problem with this particular feature, or I want to see this or that” and that’s where I truly believe in the fact that you should release, iterate and continue to evolve as fast as possible.

Paul: Ok, that’s interesting. Can we talk briefly about community and community culture, because I’m fascinated by this idea that as the different applications launch they all develop little cultures of their own, if that makes sense, and Digg has got this reputation as being quite an edgy and has this kind of edginess to it, where there’s the classic one about posting the key for (something??) and they’re quite bulshy, they know what they think, they are very opinionated. How much do you think that that is born out of Diggnation and the fact that you guys present a certain persona in Diggnation and that’s kind of trickled through to who you’ve attracted on the site and how people have chosen to interact on the site?

Kevin: I haven’t really put that much thought into it, but I know that initially during the early days, well we launched before Diggnation so we always kind of had it was an edgy group to begin with and so

Paul: Perhaps it’s just the people you know

Kevin: Yeah, maybe I have some shady friends, no, but I think that there was some of the people that initially came to the site were fans of TagTV, which was the television network that I was involved in and all that, and so these were early adopter geeks and then we started the podcast later and that grew along with the site, but I think that today I really wish there was as many people listening to the podcast as there are diggers, ’cause right now last month I think we did around 40 million uniques on the site and on Diggnation site 150,000-200,000 people, so it’s kind of separated.

Paul: Perhaps the culture was established before has perpetuated.

Kevin: Sure

Paul: Have you found that a problem as you’ve expanded out into new areas? As different people come into the site, are they finding it quite hard to break in?

Kevin: Yeah, I think so absolutely. There’s no one single universal homepage that’s going to suit everyone and I don’t think that you’re ever going to be able to throw millions of people into the same chat room-slash-comment stream and expect them to all get along. So our big push with some of the new redesign and stuff that we’re doing with the next version of Digg is going to be to break up these sandboxes into smaller areas and service a lot more of the long tail of content, so that if my mom comes onto Digg there’ll be something for her to jump into. Versus today, she would look at the front page and be like “I don’t understand all these crazy Internet memes”

Paul: From our point of view as web designers, even the Tech section is too broad for us, we want our own Web Design subsection so that suits us perfectly

Kevin: Absolutely. I’ve been hearing that from the Linux and Unix candy(?) for a long time.

Paul: You talk about this redesign that you’re working on at the moment and we’ve had Daniel on the show a few times and he did our SXSW special where he was very rude to me – but we’ll gloss over that. You talked about in your presentation about how Daniel talked about this idea of simplicity “what can we take away”. Do you want to talk a little bit more about that because that’s something we hark on about a lot so it’s nice to hear you say it too.

Kevin: I think that there is, especially when you get to a certain size, it’s very easy when you’re a small company an you’re five people, like-minded individuals and you’re all trying to build a core product and you know what’s good for the web. Then as you grow into a larger 20, 30, 50-plus person company, you get different opinions and different takes on how to build websites. You have a biz-dev that says “wouldn’t it be great if we had this feature,” marketing that says “it would be great if we could have another banner ad here,” you have the CEO that wants a little something else – there’s so many cooks in the kitchen. It’s important, I think, to always strive to have as least clutter and just a clean, light-weight experience that people can grock(?). People tend to forget that and it’s very easy to say “I want the entire kitchen sink as a feature-set and present all on the same page”. Hopefully there’s someone in charge of the company that can fight those battles, because as you get bigger there’s more and more battles to fight when it comes to that kind of stuff.

Paul: We do a lot of large public sector and very bureaucratic websites – that’s the kind of work that we do – and that’s terrible for that because they have entire committees that are arguing over what content to put on their site, so it’s something I’m very familiar with. There’s a great book which you might have read called “Laws of Simplicity” – have you read that?

Kevin: I haven’t read it, no.

Paul: Superb book! Which talks about exactly this and how to go about simplifying anything, from your life right the way through to a website. It’s really interesting stuff. John Madda, I think.

Kevin: I have to write that down. I am typing it to the iPhone as we speak.

Paul: Do you have any questions you wanted to ask?

Stanton: Yeah, one of the key things I took away from your talk is when you said: “stop thinking you understand your users and learn what they actually do”. You said you do user testing, is there anything else?

Kevin: To be honest I don’t even like user testing. I think user testing is great for the big gotchas, like where you’ll slap your forehead and say “oh boy, I don’t know how we were about to miss that one” just before their products went live. I remember even before launching Digg – I was probably about 3 weeks out – and I was showing my friends, who I respect their opinion on all things Internet, I was showing them what Digg was. And several of them were like “I just don’t get it,” “I kinda understand what you’re trying to do” In my mind, there’s been so many times when you have so many well-educated people give you an opinion one way or another on whether or not something’s gonna work, but until you actually release it and get it in real users hands, you really don’t know what’s gonna happen – and it can go either way. I’m not saying there isn’t stuff you can do to, hopefully, make it go into a positive way. Like when you’re developing a feature, you’re bouncing it off the right types of advisors and people that you trust in the community that can think through some of these problems. But I think that 9 times out of 10 it’s better, rather than try and over-think it and sit there and say “we absolutely have to have this as part of the release” or arguing for weeks on end over how something should go, I’d rather take that time, make a decision: develop it, release it, and if it doesn’t work – worst case – you change it. That’s worst case! So many people forget that, they think it has to be perfect before they get it out there and it’s like “Get it out there!” because they’re just wasting time. It kills me when I watch people going on and on for weeks debating things. When in the same amount of time they could’ve released it, fixed the problems and re-released the code.

Paul: There’s seems to be this perception that the web is some kind of fixed thing that once it’s out there, people have almost got the attitude that it’s like printing a book; there’s no going back.

Kevin: Without a doubt! They think it’s like printing a book. And the other thing is they think that failure is a horrible thing. I don’t see it like that. If you fail at least you’re being real with your user-base. Jump on the blog, write a post and say “You know what, we fucked up there. That was a bad feature, we should’ve done it like this. Thanks for your feedback. Here’s the new feature.”

Paul: There’s a great quote from Winston Churchill who said once that “Success is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm” which just sums it up brilliantly. Any other things?

Stanton: You mentioned building a group of advisors, a group of people you trust and can not be afraid of to show ideas to and get their feedback, even if its bad feedback. And you talked about not necessarily designers or developers. What kind of advisors do you have, not necessarily for Digg ’cause I guess they’re quite high-business-level people, but for small ideas that you have that just bounce off people?

Kevin: I don’t have any official advisory roles on my other projects, but if you’re fortunate enough to befriend people in the industry that you really respect their opinion – I’m always bouncing ideas off of Tony from Zappos or like some of the WeFollow Twitter directory stuff off of Ed from Twitter – you need these guys. Even if you don’t have official advisory roles with them where you’re giving them shares, just to be able to sit down and have a coffee and brainstorm is just such a valuable thing. Even some of our angel investors, some of the best angels can be advisors as well; they’re not just investors, but hopefully you’re allowing them to invest in your company because they’re adding value outside of just the money that they’re contributing. So some of our angels are just extremely well-connected people in the Bay area or wherever, and to just be able to go to them and say “you know I’m having a really hard time with image storage or scalability in this area” and they go “oh, well I’ve worked with a guy here, I know this guy here and let me just set up a lunch “and they send 2 emails and because we both mutually respect that investor, they’re willing to get together with you. Little things like that can be really valuable.

Paul: Kevin, thank you so much. I know you’ve gotta go on and do other stuff, so thank you for taking time to come on the show and maybe we’ll talk to you in future.

Kevin: Sounds good, thanks for having me.

Thanks goes to Simon Hamp for transcribing this interview.