Re: sustainable swag

Mark wrote:

> But there was earlier software,
> and a surprising amount of it
> survives because it works (for
> some value of 'works') and is
> expensive to remake.

Yeah, I figured it was something like that.

(And I still question the wisdom of building more systems -- such as 
electronic voting -- on top of such a shaky foundation.)


Moving back on-topic: this kind of poor database design is actually a 
sustainability issue for nonprofits, I think.

Heifer has a good article on "Giving in a Down Economy: What Do Hard 
Times Mean for Nonprofits?" (Winter 2010 issue of _World Ark_, pp. 30-33)

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/heifer/worldark_2010winter/index.php#/32

wherein it is noted:

	"... the key factor in whether or not a nonprofit survives is
	not the nature of its work but the relationship it has with
	its donors."

In my experience, this all-important relationship is too often 
mediated by a poorly-designed database which alienates donors and 
mismanages contact and communications. Largely because of this, I have 
quit giving to some worthy organizations, and upped my giving to others.

The hyphen problem is prevalent, of course, and is compounded when one 
organization passes my error-ridden contact data to every other 
organization in their network. It's bad enough being deluged with 
poorly-scheduled mailings from everyone at the same time, but several 
of these groups also send return address labels, notecards, notepads, 
etc. pre-printed with some garbled version of my name, rendering them 
unusable, even were I so inclined to decorate my envelopes with tacky 
little hearts & flowers.

Worse yet, since the labels include personal data, I feel compelled to 
shred and trash the sheets of labels (shredded paper not being 
acceptable in some recycling bins).

If my household is any indication, this generates an incredible amount 
of unnecessary waste.

Another pet peeve: gender bias introduced somewhere in the data 
collection process, such that my male partner's name is harvested from 
joint checks, which have my name first and my signature at the bottom 
and on all accompanying paperwork. Usually, the first communications 
come to me alone. After I've written a check, my partner's name is 
added, and the database transposes our names, putting his name first 
(probably because his name is the most recently entered), and 
addressing him instead of me on all future correspondence. In the 
process, sometimes my name gets truncated because of field-length 
limitations (both of our names are long). And sometimes they just do 
away with my name altogether.

I know it's petty to worry about such things when people are actually 
starving and in desperate need the world over, but petty I am! ;-)

Deborah
_____

Deborah Taylor-Pearce
[email protected]

___________________________________________________________________

Use the following address to post a message to all subscribers: 
 [email protected]

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your options, visit:
 http://list.InformationDesign.org/mailman/listinfo/infodesign-cafe

For all Information Design matters:
 http://InformationDesign.org

Problems? Write to:
 [email protected]
___________________________________________________________________