Core Tenets
Tenets are guiding principles.
They are concise directives that articulate, ultimately bringing alignment to, a collective’s ideology. Well-crafted tenets are a wholistic, but not exhaustive, ordered lists of principles. They are the pillars on which our products, methodologies, and beliefs are built on.
_____ _____ _____
@ @ @ @ @ @
||| ||| |||
||| ||| |||
||| ||| |||
||| ||| |||
(___) (___) (___)
~~ The Pillars ~~
Like pillars, they should be singular columns, each tenet representing one and only one idea. Each pillar should be load bearing: the nonessential or obvious need-not dilute the list. And finally, like the pillars above, they should be iconic (even as low-fidelity ASCII art, the above pillars are iconically Ionic). Iconic tenets are powerfully simple and easy to remember. Probably about three, but that’s not a hard and fast rule.
Goodbyte’s core tenets:
- Make it good
- Make it nice
- Make it work
These tenets guide not only how we do things, but what we choose to do. They are ordered in terms of importance: it is not worth making something work if it is not nice, it is not worth making something nice if it is not good.
In these sentences, “it” refers to the products of our company. That is to say, absolutely anything the collective produces — every website we publish, every tweet we post, every customer service email we send, every decision we make.
Make it good.
The most critical of the three, “make it good” involves a two-pronged approach. Firstly, it must do-good for humanity. This means having the best interests of every person who comes into contact with our products, delivering them more value than they pay for (and on that note, acknowledging how much they have paid, whether it be in dollars, data, ad-consumption, or time). Doing good means acting as ethically as possible, no matter the cost. Choosing to do things that we think create a measurably better world, even if it is measurably minute.
Making things good must also involve those who do not interact with our products. We must critically examine who we exclude from our products and work to undo our conscious and unconscious biases. We must consider the people whose oppression has advantaged us: the land we occupy, the system we profit from. We must also undo these systems at every point we can. “Make it good” means making things that benefit humanity as a whole, in a system that defaults to benefiting a few.
@
@ /\ #######
@ / \ #########
]/ [] \ ###\#|#/###
/ [][] \ ###\|/###
| __ | # }|{
| |! | }|{
| || | }|{The second prong, is doing good for the planet. We must operate in environmentally conscious way, and consider the impact of what we create. The world of “green tech” is rather sparse, so in practical terms, this means making small choices that can improve energy consumption and continuing to learn and experiment in this regard.
While many companies believe they are doing good for the world, they prioritize profits and act ethically when possible. Independent creators see the work they do as impassioned thrusts towards a greater good, but it is an unexamined thrust, and ends counter-productively. It is not enough to “create jobs” or “make things people love.” Those claims are really just profitable decisions masquerading as ethical ones. Goodbyte prioritizes acting ethically. If we are unable to do the things we want to do while doing so, then we do not deserve to do those things at all.
Make it nice.
There are too many not-nice things in the world. Too many slow websites, too many rude Youtube comments, too many ugly packaging designs. We do not want to add to this mess. Everything we produce should be nice, clear, and delightful.
Whether a “design-y” thing (like a website) or a “no design” thing (like an API), both have absolutely the same about of design involved. And both should prioritize being nice (whatever tha means in the context of the thing). Prioritize usability, prioritize aesthetics, and above all, prioritize thoughtful decision making.
“Design-y” things have lots of obvious designing to do, but “no design” things still require smart planning. They have lots of perhaps non-obvious designing to do, and opportunities to do things a little better than they need to be.
________
.'░░░/ '.
/░░░░| FORM \
|░░░░░░\. |
|░░░░░░░░\ |
\░ FUNC ░| /
'░░░░░░░/_.'These “design-y” and “not design” things are a part of every project in some amount and usually referred to as form and function. However, these terms are often placed at odds with each other (“form over function”), creating a false dichotomy: each always informs the other.
A well designed brand can make a product feel faster, more robust, and improve learnability. Well designed functionality can make a product seem calmer, friendlier, or smarter.
Make it work.
Of course, at the end of the day things need to work. It’s not enough to have ideas, even really good ones. Creating real, functional things is our end objective. It is also worth articulating that this means functional for everyone. The things we make should work for people no matter the person. Even if it’s an unachievable goal.
There is also the more colloquial interpretation: Problem? Make it work. We are persistent. We have a demonstrable history of figuring it out and we’ll do it again. We make it work.
Things need to be nice before they need to work.
Remember, tenets are ordered lists. There is nothing more important than making it good. Only making it good is more important than making it nice. So I think it is fair to question how making something nice (superficial) could possibly be more important than making it work? Especially if the “make it work” part is where accessibility comes in and everything?
The answer