On 01/07/2016 03:02 AM, mray wrote: > On 05.01.2016 21:42, Michael Siepmann wrote: >> <snip> > Awesome! > This looks like something I would fill out without feeling nagged. > > You mentioned that making these handouts look not too professional is a > good idea. This makes sense, but where would you draw the line? What are > good examples for things that need not to be top quality? Most things that are presented as "finished" artifacts should look as professional and high quality as possible in order to convey the quality and professionalism of the organization. However, when soliciting feedback, there are two ways in which this doesn't apply in quite the same way:
1. People may feel more comfortable giving honest and constructive feedback about artifacts that look like drafts or sketches, etc. When something looks like it has been painstakingly tweaked and polished, people may hesitate to criticize it out of politeness, imagining that the people requesting feedback really just hope to be told how great it is. 2. The materials for gathering feedback (e.g. these printed handouts) don't have to look as professional and high quality as most artifacts because they are clearly temporary in nature, and their primary purpose is to get input from those giving feedback, so it makes sense for them to seem focused on that purpose rather than on the purpose of showing how professional the organization is. They should still be high quality in the sense of being well laid out, not having typos, etc. They just don't need to look like a glossy brochure type of thing. Does that make the distinction clearer? Best, Michael _______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
