On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:35:03PM +0200, Robert Martinez (mray) wrote: > > > On 08.08.2016 19:55, Michael Siepmann wrote: > > Here's a revised mockup without the pledge subtotal and showing > > both the "too low" and "too high" reasons for carryover. In this > > example, the user increased their limit in July. There are other > > changes also, such as noting what the limit was on the charge > > line. I'm also atttaching the .ODS file. > > > > > I think there need to be two distinct representations of your > activity on snowdrift. > > 1. A *complete* log of all activity, including details as date and > time when any project pledge button was used to pledge/unpledge, > date and time when your payment processor got set up correctly, when > you money actually got transferred, ... just *lots* of details. > > 2. An overview of what just happened, reassuring that things are > going as you expect them to go, and that you understood the > crowdmatching mechanism and that YOU are in control. > > Assuming that both views are needed my approach is to visually > support each accordingly. Your mockup seems closer to a > representation as in "1." But I'd like to have a very simple and > intuitive view in MVP that mainly addresses the understanding of the > mechanism rather than controlling its accuracy. Of course we need > both to live up to our proclaimed goals of transparency. My > rationale to go for "2." is that we are on a journey to approach > people and earn enough trust so that they give up control and hand > it over to our mechanism. Having good intentions(tm) and having > simple rules like: "Never over limit!" & "Always under 10% fees!" is > a good start. But we also need to create an experience of being the > driving force in that mechanism, and my impression is that > representation "2." supports that better than "1." > > > Michael, do you agree a distinction of "1." and "2." makes sense? > > > My premise to a representation of "2." is: > > --- "What did I pay last months - and why?" --- > > This question needs to be answered as simple and clear as possible. > Once we start explaining more we'll have a hard time to stay simple > and justifying not to go into even more detail. > > > So looking at your mockup this goes through my mind: > * Why does paying $0 have to look as complex? > * Why are numbers of patrons so prominent? > * Why list projects that got no money from me? > * Why is the day of the month of transaction important? > > > My attached mockup addresses those issues by > * simplifying $0-months and making the carry-over visually obvious > * moving patrons away from where you probably do some quick math > * removing suspended projects > * removing the date > > I do agree though, that having the respective limit for each month > is necessary, so I added that bit of information. >
I think this looks amazing. But I am easily wowed by nice graphics. Looking forward to Michael's response. Robert, I'm also curious how you think we should handle that stupid edge case of "This month + Last month's carryover > Limit". I wish we could just abolish that edge case somehow. Not sure it's possible though.
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design