On 06/02/2015 12:50 AM, mray wrote: > > > On 02.06.2015 00:47, Aaron Wolf wrote: >>>> I propose: >>>> >>>> A. we have a one-click default pledge button >>>> B. we offer the more in-depth pledge options >>>> C. we present the pledges as "X per patron" and emphasize the value of >>>> the network effect >>>> D. we finish prototyping and designing and testing >> ... >> I don't think this is confusing at all. Ignore for now the idea of >> setting a different default pledge. The single "pledge" button in the >> simpler interface = 0.1¢ per patron. End of story. It's very simple. >> >> Now, *offering* an advanced interface to pledge at higher levels isn't >> confusing either. Instead of 0.1¢ per patron, you might pledge 0.2¢ or >> 1.5¢ or something. Not at all confusing. You are pledging to donate this >> much per patron. If there are X patrons, you donate X * your pledge. >> >> Thus, there is no incompatibility between A and B. And there is no room >> for confusion. If you don't adjust things via the advanced options, your >> pledge is 0.1¢. That's perfectly consistent and reliable. > > There is probably a misunderstanding again. I totally get this and don't > say it is confusing. My question is: > > Does the button just say: > "(Pledge!)"? > or does it provide interactive options to change the value: > "(Pledge 0.1¢ [+-])"? > or does it provide multiple buttons: > "(Pledge 0.1¢)(Pledge 0.2¢)(Pledge 0.4¢)"? > or does it just indicate a preset amount: > "(Pledge 0.1¢)"? >
I don't think we want a complex interactive button nor multiple different buttons where have to choose one. I think the most familiar is to use interfaces much like people are familiar with on other sites. When it comes to choosing pledge levels, the standard experience is this: https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPage&country=US&uselang=en&utm_medium=WmfWikiLink&utm_source=Home&utm_campaign=wikimediafoundation.org Note that the different donation levels are *not* actual submit buttons, they are just different-looking radio buttons. Here's a more traditional example: https://action.aclu.org/secure/our-civil-liberties-are-under-attack-6?s_src=UNS150001C00&ms=web_4square_addlgift This is effectively what we have currently, see https://snowdrift.coop/p/snowdrift (just swap "shares" for numbers like 0.1¢, 0.2¢, 0.3¢, 0.5¢ ) and add "per patron" after the radio options. This is the most familiar approach, and our membership donation system really is the same as doing a monthly donation to Wikimedia or the ACLU, just add the matching others effect. I think this is the interface to stick with since it is the most common and makes sense. But I see the value of simple one-click buttons as well, and I don't think we have to exclude that. (see my comments below) > The issue here is that having a simple (non-interactive, non-indicating) > button requires that there isn't much to set up about it since > everything is clear. But If there are options to choose from they need > NOT to be only present in some user settings page. They should be > visible and easy to understand at the very moment and the very place of > interaction. Amazon.com has "add to cart" type of buttons but also "one-click buy" buttons. If you add something to your cart, you can go and edit it later, and when you "check out" you choose various options. If you do the one-click, you're done, it just goes with your defaults for shipping and payment etc. I think it's perfectly fine to have a simple button and an "advanced" view for more options. The thing is, we need to have a *link* to the advanced options next to the simple button so that it is transparent that it exists. We aren't hiding anything by offering a quick pledge button on the general listing of multiple projects. We need to include links to further options. > > Now you seem to suggest having it both ways: having a simple button but > also variable settings somewhere else, which does not NECESSARILY be > misleading but imho it is, since it is in-transparent. > > I don't think it is in-transparent or misleading though, if you can > change your pledge value globally somewhere else and use a simple button. > > >> .... >> I think the design will be that the overall project listing (the page of >> many projects) should have one pledge button per project that just >> enters a base-level pledge. The more detailed page for each project >> should show the options for higher pledge levels. Users might go >> straight to the individual project page and pledge at various levels >> (where we should still have the base-level be the default) *or* they >> might click the initial simpler button but then later visit the >> individual page and choose to increase their pledge (or not). > > I dislike the idea of having different pledge buttons at different > hierarchical levels. I this should be a dead save and 100% consistent. > pledging should work equally well and equally fine grained at an level > and every page throughout the site. > > I don't agree on a hard rule that all pledge buttons need completely identical behavior, but I think the issue here is about the difference between one-click versus a more confirmation-style pledge process. You've been pushing toward a one-click for simplicity, but I'm wary about that. If one click meant "I donated $1" one time, then fine. But in our case, a pledge is a more significant commitment long-term. One-click would encourage people to not understand or take seriously the pledge if we make the process *too* short and simple. I think the best behavior is that we have a simple "pledge" button but, for a new user, clicking it brings up the options and confirmation process. We want to present to people the stats "this is how much your pledge value is right now, this is how much this many other patrons add because you're joining", and "your pledge is an ongoing agreement to the social contract to do your part by donating 0.1¢ per patron who supports this project with you". That sort of thing, and people should need to confirm their pledge. Now, I think, like with Amazon one-click purchase, it is *fine* to let people do one-click default pledging to many projects *after* they have already gone through a normal pledge confirmation process and set up their defaults. They obviously will need to have set up payment options etc. So, in summary: we always offer the full interface with radio buttons to everyone as an option. When someone is first pledging, we should always go to the options view and ask for confirmation. But there's nothing wrong with an option to let people "make this level my default and allow one-click pledges" and *then* allow them to click a lot of projects with a single-click on the multi-project listings now that they understand the concept. We should *still* have a clear link for the options next to the one-click pledge buttons. > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- Aaron Wolf co-founder, Snowdrift.coop music teacher, wolftune.com -- Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
