That friend speaks my mind.
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Aaron Wolf <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 10/07/2015 12:29 PM, Stephen Michel wrote: > > In the context of our recent discussion > > < > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/pipermail/design/2015-September/000096.html> > > about the home page... > > > > Here's a pretty common thing that happens in communication between a > > user (Bob) and a designer (Alice). > > > > *Bob's Perspective:* Bob wants to give Alice some feedback about an > > email application he uses. Bob keeps hitting the delete button when he > > means to hit the save button. He wants to give good feedback, so he > > brainstorms a bit, and finally tells Alice that he thinks the > > application would be better if the save button were bigger. Alice > > replies, saying she won't make the save button any bigger. Bob is > > frustrated, and argues back with Alice. > > > > *Alice's Perspective:* Bob emailed Alice with a suggestion to make the > > save button bigger. However, if Alice did that, it would break the > > aesthetic of the application, and moreover, she's not sure if it would > > actually solve Bob's problem! Alice is frustrated, because she's arguing > > with Bob, and because Bob has an unsolved issue. > > > > *Analysis:* When Bob sends Alice only a suggestion, Alice is left with > > only two actionable options: implement (bad because Bob's suggestion > > introduces new problems) or not (she can also follow up with Bob, but > > Bob's still attached to his solution and upset it didn't happen). The > > problem is twofold: in his zeal to provide good feedback, Bob is > > actually providing a suggestion -- essentially, doing design work -- > > rather than feedback. However, he can't be expected to know what would > > be most helpful without Alice letting him know what kind of feedback is > > helpful. As it is, Alice is stuck trying to work backwards from Bob's > > suggestion to exactly what his problem is. > > > > What should really happen, is a discussion between Alice and Bob to > > figure out what Bob's issues is (for example, the 'save' and 'delete' > > buttons are too close to each other and have icons that are too > > similar). Then Alice has the flexibility to design a solution that fixes > > Bob's problem without introducing new issues. > > > > It's also worth mentioning that if Bob provides only a suggestion, then > > even if Alice follows up with, "I'm not going to implement that > > particular suggestion but let's try to figure out a better one," Bob is > > still left with a sour taste in his mouth because he has a tendency to > > become attached to his solution. > > > > With that in mind, I'm going to try to give a bunch of feedback such > > that we can have a discussion about what should change, rather than > > arguing about whether the scene needs more trees. More indented --> more > > specific suggestions --> more change-able as long as the higher-level > > stuff doesn't change. > > > > --- > > > > *I believe that our landing page should provide a 1-second emotional > > explanation of why we care (or, why an arbitrary internet user should > > care) about Snowdrift.coop.* > > /"Together, we can uncover this awesome thing that's currently being > > suppressed."/ > > - They'll get a longer explanation of why they should care deeper into > > the site, but I think this is important as a hook, to get them to be > > invested immediately and keep them reading. > > > > *Thoughts on how to achieve this.* > > - I don't think a sense of "path" is important. > > - I think a sense of "barren wasteland" is important to *keep.* > > - HOWEVER, I also think there needs to be a sense of "If we cleared away > > this snow, it'd be a vibrant place!" I think this is the sense of > > vibrancy that Aaron was missing. Unlike Aaron, I don't think it needs to > > be explicit. > > - I think having something like a streak of green on a tree could have > > this effect. > > - I think version 27 > > < > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/older%20exports/export27/landing.png > > > > is the worst offender in this regard. It feels like if you cleared away > > the snow, you'd still be standing in the middle of a tundra. > > - Bonus points if there's a sense of the awesome thing being communal / > > a community. > > - I think the houses in the background in version 1 do this well. > > - I think the latest, version 33 > > < > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export33/landing.png > >, > > does this better than version 32 > > < > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export30/landing.png > >, > > because the mountain in the background is a little more prominent. > > - I also personally like it because there's less of that blue strip > > next to the path. I really don't like that strip of blue. > > - I'm talking about visuals. I think it's supposed to give a sense > > of a snowbank, but only because I've seen previous iterations. As it is, > > it just looks like a flat shape on the ground. It barely even gives me a > > sense of depth. It's really hard for me to look at the picture because > > it's *SO* flat. v33 does help with this, but only a little. > > > > Cheers, > > Stephen > > > > Thanks for the thoughts, Stephen. While the meta discussion stuff is > sensible, the issue boils down to making sure we communicate productively. > > To the point: I agree that without context from seeing previous > iterations, the strip of blue is just not clear enough what that is, > what's going on. Even with the new version the sense of real deep snow > is lacking. It feels just like there's snow on the ground at all. > > Ignoring the issues of destination and trees (because each of these > items is independent), the core issue is that the sense of the thickness > of the snow and the sense of a bank of snow or otherwise just the > immediate visceral clarity of "think snow blocking the road" is lacking > in the recent iterations. I agree that lots of subtle things are better > from iterations just before to iteration 33. > > What I can say clearly is: > https://snowdrift.coop/static/img/intro/snowdrift.png and the earlier > iterations from Robert feel more clear visually. Like I can flash the > image by someone and they get it instantly: there's a road, it's > blocked-by/covered-in heavy snow. The new illustration merely achieves > "it's snowy, I guess there's a road or something, not sure what that > blue strip is." > > Now, do I know what the solution is? No. My speculations involve things > like better outlines, better shadows, somewhat longer visible part of > the road… I suspect a harder sense of clear-road up to a point where > BLAM there's heavy snow in the way… that would help. So maybe the point > is to show it more partially cleared already — that could mean a little > longer cleared road and higher snow banks and snow piles on the side of > the road framing it and indicating some work already accomplished, but > then you can see there's lots more to do. > > I'm not strictly tied to any particular suggestion, I'm trying to > describe the inadequacy of the current status, and yes, speculating with > some ideas about what might help. > > Cheers, > Aaron > > -- > Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> > _______________________________________________ > Design mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design >
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
