In Episode 14, host Virgil Carroll and co-host Cole dig into a core truth behind most UX mistakes: people don’t pay attention. From sending a message to the wrong person to confusing web forms, today’s digital missteps often stem from one thing—poorly designed experiences that expect users to be careful, focused, or even logical.

But here’s the hard truth: they’re not.

That’s why UX exists—to design for inattention, not perfection. In this episode, Virgil and Cole explore how small misjudgments in interface design can lead to big problems, and why it’s time to stop blaming the user and start designing smarter.

They dig into key lessons and takeaways, including:

✅ Why assuming users will “just pay attention” is a guaranteed way to fail

✅ The danger of designing tools for internal teams instead of real users

✅ How AI and other tools can mislead teams if used without critical thinking

✅ Why user feedback beats assumptions—every single time

✅ What it really means to design for the lowest common denominator

From confusing buttons and abandoned carts to real-world usability failures, Virgil shares insights from decades of experience that highlight how easy it is to get digital experiences wrong when we ignore how people actually behave.

If you’ve ever wondered why people keep screwing up your carefully planned interface—or if you’re trying to build something that works for all humans, not just ideal ones—this episode’s for you.

For more conversations about digital strategy, UX, accessibility, and all the ways we get it wrong (and how to get it right), visit www.discussingstupid.com and subscribe on your favorite podcast platform.

(0:00) - Intro

(2:10) - People don't pay attention

(4:41) - Are people bad at browsing or is tech too complex?

(6:49) - Will AI shape the future of UX?

(10:50) - The gap between internal assumptions and real user needs

(14:27) - Build for the lowest common denominator

(17:40) - Outro

Subscribe for email updates on our website:

https://www.discussingstupid.com/

Watch us on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/@discussingstupid

Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Soundcloud:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/discussing-stupid-a-byte-sized-podcast-on-stupid-ux/id1428145024

https://open.spotify.com/show/0c47grVFmXk1cco63QioHp?si=87dbb37a4ca441c0

https://soundcloud.com/discussing-stupid

Check us out on socials:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/discussing-stupid

https://www.instagram.com/discussingstupid/

https://www.facebook.com/discussingstupid

https://x.com/DiscussStupid

In Episode 13.1, host Virgil Carroll is joined by co-host Cole and developer Chad to talk about something deceptively complicated: color. Specifically, the intersection of color palettes, visual design, and accessibility—and why getting it wrong can tank your user experience.

While color choices often get made in design tools or branding meetings, they don’t always translate well to real-world implementation. The crew breaks down why the prettiest colors can create the ugliest accessibility problems once they hit the web.

They dig into key challenges and lessons, including:

✅ Why accessible design isn’t just about having the right colors—it's about using them correctly

✅ How contrast ratios break down across devices and screen sizes

✅ Why bright and “fun” color palettes often fail accessibility testing

✅ How to bring visual flair to a site without sacrificing inclusivity

✅ The difference between decorative vs. purposeful color use—and why it matters

From failed color combinations to misused font sizing, Virgil, Cole, and Chad share their own battle scars from High Monkey’s recent site redesign—and explain how inclusive design forces teams to think functionally, not just aesthetically.

If you’ve ever struggled to make your brand colors work on the web—or if you're tired of your site failing contrast tests but you still want some color pop—this episode’s for you.

For more conversations about digital strategy, UX, accessibility, and all the ways we get it wrong (and how to get it right), visit www.discussingstupid.com and subscribe on your favorite podcast platform.

(0:00) - Intro

(2:43) - Accessibility and your brand's color palette

(6:03) - Factoring in font sizes

(7:54) - I still want color pop on my website!!

(11:36) - The approach we took with our new site's color scheme

(15:13) - Outro

Subscribe for email updates on our website:

https://www.discussingstupid.com/

Watch us on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/@discussingstupid

Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Soundcloud:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/discussing-stupid-a-byte-sized-podcast-on-stupid-ux/id1428145024

https://open.spotify.com/show/0c47grVFmXk1cco63QioHp?si=87dbb37a4ca441c0

https://soundcloud.com/discussing-stupid

Check us out on socials:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/discussing-stupid

https://www.instagram.com/discussingstupid/

https://www.facebook.com/discussingstupid

https://x.com/DiscussStupid

In Episode 12, host Virgil Carroll is joined by co-host Cole from High Monkey to dig into a deceptively tricky topic: metadata—what it is, how it works, and why getting it right is more about balance than perfection.

Metadata plays a huge role in findability, search accuracy, and content structure. But when it comes to tagging your content, more isn’t always better—and less definitely isn’t enough. That’s where the concept of the “metadata Goldilocks zone” comes in.

They unpack the most common metadata mistakes and what to do instead, including:

✅ Why under-tagging leaves your site relying on search engine guesswork

✅ How over-tagging renders metadata meaningless

✅ What makes a tag actually useful (and when it’s just noise)

✅ How to approach metadata as an evolving strategy—not a one-time fix

Virgil shares hard-won lessons from consulting across industries, explaining why metadata success depends on both the structure and the context of your content. From internal file systems to public websites, they explore how to build better tagging frameworks without falling into analysis paralysis.

To wrap things up, they offer a practical rule of thumb for anyone managing metadata: optimize for the 80% of user needs first—and let real usage data guide the rest.

For more conversations about digital strategy, search, UX, and all the ways we get it wrong (and how to get it right), visit www.discussingstupid.com and subscribe on your favorite podcast platform.

(0:00) - Intro

(2:27) - What even is metadata?

(4:10) - Metadata is not one-size-fits-all

(7:20) - The dangers of under tagging

(10:00) - The dangers of over tagging

(12:43) - Finding the “Goldilocks” zone with metadata

(15:30) - Virgil’s verdict: Follow the 80/20 rule

Subscribe for email updates on our website:

https://www.discussingstupid.com/

Watch us on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/@discussingstupid

Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Soundcloud:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/discussing-stupid-a-byte-sized-podcast-on-stupid-ux/id1428145024

https://open.spotify.com/show/0c47grVFmXk1cco63QioHp?si=87dbb37a4ca441c0

https://soundcloud.com/discussing-stupid

Check us out on socials:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/discussing-stupid

https://www.instagram.com/discussingstupid/

https://www.facebook.com/discussingstupid

https://x.com/DiscussStupid