Hey Thomas, thanks for reading and for the comment. Let me address some of your thoughts:

Why can't the third party review all articles that are posted?

3rd parties cannot review all articles that are posted because there is simply too much content on the internet. What happens if people start abusing the report feature? See my second graphic.

Why assume a neutral third party is corrupt in the first place?

I don't believe I have made this assumption anywhere in my piece, can you point me to where my language may have been misleading?

aren't you basing this all off of the assumption that FB has to be involved in the curation?

Yes I am. That is the point of the whole post—that Facebook is already the tacit curator of this information, and by changing just a few of the inputs (platform abuse, recently passed propaganda laws, etc) they are poised to become the explicit manipulator.

Let me know if this has answered any of your questions!

You have got to be kidding me.

The items on this list have absolutely nothing to do with design. They are just big ticket events that "happened" in 2016. There have been real trends with concrete sources of influence that made a significant impact on visual design this year... I can't tell what's more of a joke: the linked list, or this community for failing to even notice that it has nothing to do with design

I enjoyed Brand New by Wally Olins, one of the forefathers of corporate identity. It has nothing about process or methodology, but as a high level overview of branding as a concept and how it has evolved, I found it helpful.

Also, shoutout to the person who recommended Uncorporate Identity by Metahaven on this thread.

Hey Hayden, overall nice site! Pleasant CSS animations. One thing that strikes me is the second "benefit" statement:

"Job seekers can purchase Presumi credits (or get them from their university or TAFE) for unlocking analytics and other goodies."

This strikes me as classic example of describing the method, rather than the benefit. Users aren't likely to get excited about an alternate credit system, so it seems like a distraction from the actual benefit which is "Only pay for the insights you’re interested in." Maybe there's a better way to reinforce that message instead!

Hey Shaun, There's some good comments here on diversity. Another dimension to it is: do these writers need featuring at all? I suggest that the most influential founders and entrepreneurs don't need another megaphone to amplify their voices—their opinions are already overrepresented, over-retweeted, over-featured by Medium, etc.

Who we should be hearing from are the world's smartest but marginalised perspectives. Most of us in the startup world are already knee deep in its discourse—what we need are fresh, alternative perspectives. People who can critique or challenge our culture, and who aren't necessarily writing from the viewpoint of the traditional "successful startup founder / investor," have valuable, insightful, and educational things to say as well.

I have a lot of respect for Crew as a company, and I encourage you help build a startup culture that isn't an echo chamber. Would love to talk more if there's a way I can help out.

Hey guys congrats on launch. You've heard from me a gajillion times but I'll say it again that this service rocks.

One thing that's a bit unclear in the new pricing is how many sites a user is allowed to run concurrently on the different plans. Can you provide some more clarity around that?

Great comment Gabriel, your interpretation seem to be on the money.

I'd add that Eli also seems to be making a statement about not just the UI but importantly the branding. He's saying that Instagram missed or willfully ignored an opportunity to leverage their historical brand and aesthetics just for the sake of making a decision in line with the current trends.

To dig deeper into that, he's bringing IG's design team to task for their design-by-committee approach, in addition to this capitulation to trends. This is a statement about the role of designers and what role we play. Part of our job is certainly interpreting trends and working in relation to them, but it doesn't mean complete submission. If branding and visual design is intended to communicate, the IG team (according to Eli) has totally missed the boat by selecting these obtuse gradients that signify nothing.

For what it's worth, I completely agree that Eli's writing never quite clearly states its thesis, which would go a long way toward it being read for its critique and value and not just seen as bashing.

+1 Siteleaf, it's a dream to use

Kinda cool, it sort of takes the GTD philosophy behind Google Inbox to its logical extreme. I'm not sure I'd use this but I'm kind of curious about it!

Trend-following