On 09/05/2015 03:21 AM, mray wrote: > > > On 05.09.2015 03:03, Aaron Wolf wrote: >> Overall, the new mockups are superb, great direction. Cheers for Robert >> and his wonderful work! > > Thanks for the kind words, lets see how usable they turn out to be. > >> >> I'm not sure how much I should critique all the details until we start >> implementing and working out the final end result. I do want to address >> one issue: >> >> in >> https://github.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/blob/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export26/2-project.png >> >> The grid of "lots of patrons" is not our quadratic matching. I'm >> concerned that showing a rectangle of lots of user icons is too much >> going to confuse the message regarding the matching effect. In the >> quadratic matching, the users are only one dimension, and the other >> dimension is the per-user donation, and together it makes a square. >> >> Showing the users in a two-dimensional grid confuses things by having a >> different grid-looking chart. Also, instead of emphasizing how much >> matching a new patron will get, it feels just like "there's already lots >> of patrons, and you'll be just one more and be lost in the crowd." It >> fails to give the impression that your new pledge makes a difference. >> >> The impression we need is to get people to understand that all these >> existing patrons will donate *more* when you pledge. In other words: you >> will have an impact on this many patrons! (rather than just you will >> join them and be one more). >> >> Now, I like the wording "684 matching each other", that emphasizes how >> things work currently and the feel of interdependence and community. But >> I also want to connect the pledge button to the message that "684 >> patrons will donate *more* when you pledge". Some combination is >> possible, or maybe just both messages can be present but to be less >> redundant, only the "matching each other" would have a number and the >> pledge-focused message could be "The current patrons will all donate >> more when you pledge" without repeating the number. > > > I get your point but think your concern does not apply here. I don't see > this as a place to get any message across how the funding works. At this > point we either failed to educate in time - or hopefully more likely: > the user already knows how the page works. > We must ask ourselves what we want people to do on this page, and I > think we want them to click the pledge! button (and to be signed in with > a multi-million-dollar heavy account of course) > People should get how things work *before*, *during* or *shortly after* > they created an account. And we need to make sure that they do. > > What I *do* plan to achieve is this: Assume you know how pledging works > you start to have a interest in the number of people you are going to > match AND you want to feel good in joining them. Plain numbers are dull > and you certainly don't feel better when 614 turns into 615! But you do > when you click pledge! and a small new face turns up on the stack. That > way you are enshrined in the homepage (I assume using actual avatars > would be better but a real performance issue) and other people get an > intuitive feeling on how many people are on board already after a quick > glance. They also spot much easier if projects are newcomers or > superstars that way. > > A side note: my plan is to use differently sized heads for different > amounts of pledgers, so that the 1-80 pledge list does not feel to empty > and the 6000 strong projects don't need to scroll so much. >
I see the value of that idea of visualizing lots of patrons. I'm ok with that in general as long as we *also* include **right at the place of pledging** the idea that all these patrons will add more to match you. That's not present directly, only the idea that the existing patrons are matching each other. I really want the call-to-action and the visualization to indicate the idea that the project gets more from all these patrons *if* you pledge. That idea isn't strong enough in the mock-up. >> >> I *really* like the design otherwise! >> >> Last minor note for now: perhaps a clear watermark should be added to >> these mockups to make it totally clear what they are? >> > > As long as nothing indicates these are final I don't see a problem. > Or what information exactly are you missing? > Well, for example, we don't yet have formal partnerships / affiliation with all those organizations shown at the bottom of the mockups! We want to and probably will get that, but I don't want to imply that we have endorsements that we don't formally have yet… > >> Thanks so much for all your work Robert! I'm excited to get things >> implemented and get this thing going. >> >> Cheers, >> Aaron >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Design mailing list > Design@lists.snowdrift.coop > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design > -- Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> _______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
