On August 8, 2016 1:30:11 PM EDT, Michael Siepmann <m...@techdesignpsych.com> 
>On 08/02/2016 05:55 PM, mray wrote:
>> * items that did not contribute to a months spending can be omitted
>> clarity. Carried over pledges appear on the respective new month.
>> Suspended projects are not treated different as non-pledged and
>> not show up specially. Notifications can be used to communicate all
>I strongly disagree with this. I think omitting this information
>lack of clarity.  I think we should assume that users will rarely look
>at the history, but that when they do, it's because they want to
>understand where their money went (or didn't) and why.  That includes
>knowing that it where it did *not* go that they might have expected it
>to go, e.g. to a suspended project, and knowing why they were *not*
>charged that month, i.e. because balance was carried over.

I agree with Michael here, but there is a limit. Imagine a user who pledges to 
many projects which are then suspended as they grow, but who is also lazy  and 
leaves the pledges suspended rather than dropping them. Their history could 
become bloated with (imo) useless information as the months run by.

I think the proper place to tackle this is: if a user has not reinstated a 
suspended pledge within 3 (?) months, it should be automatically dropped. 
Apologies if we've already had this conversation; I do remember talking about 
it but not this particular facet, and mobile makes it hard to go back and 

>> * I also like keeping the history tab consistent with the running
>> matching tab.
>I do not think consistency with the main dashboard view should be a
>here.  They have very different purposes.  The purpose of the main
>dashboard view is to show your limit, your current pledges, your amount
>available to crowdmatch others, and especially the *relationship*
>between these.  This means it makes sense to use a lot of space to make
>the relationship clear.  In contrast, the purpose of the history is to
>clearly and concisely show and explain a historical record of
>transactions.  A familiar format like an account statement, that makes
>efficient use of space is much better here, in my view.

I think having the history be consistent with the main dashboard view is 
desirable but less important than a clear record of transactions.
Sent from my phone; please excuse my brevity.
Email policy: http://smichel.me/email
Design mailing list

Reply via email to