Re: [Snowdrift-design] Mockup of account history
On 08/03/2016 04:24 AM, mray wrote:
>
>
> On 03.08.2016 12:52, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> On 08/03/2016 01:31 AM, Bryan Richter wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:55:44AM +0200, Robert Martinez (mray) wrote:
On 01.08.2016 23:30, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> We discussed this in today's meeting. Here's a revised mockup,
> also attached in .ods format. This shows payment processing fees,
> two successive months of carry-over, and an example where a pledge
> was suspended:
>
Thanks for clarifying via the mockup. I think it can be simplified
in several ways:
https://snowdrift.sylphs.net/prototypes/mray/#history_page
* a pledge value/month next to a total/month isn't necessary. It
only matters what you actually paid that month. So I would only show
one sum/month.
>>>
>>> This is different from how all receipts and bills work, which show the
>>> sum-of-goods subtotal, then any fees and taxes, then a final total. Do
>>> we want to keep that just so it's more familiar?
>>>
* items that did not contribute to a months spending can be omitted for
clarity.
>>>
>>> Hm. I guess we should ask, is the purpose of this page to show *just*
>>> payment history? I don't think so. I think it is a history of
>>> participation within the mechanism. In that case, omitting items that
>>> don't contribute leads to a *lack* of clarity.
>>>
>>> Also, our hope is that we will be able to sum up a patron's
>>> contributions to all their projects, so they would only be hit by a
>>> single payment charge. In that case, it is impossible to get charged
>>> in April, but have other donations roll forward from April to May.
>>> Either a patron contributes to *all* their projects in a month, or
>>> they contribute to none of them.
>>>
>>> So: whether there is one project, or many projects, there is only one
>>> thing that matters: What do we show for a month where a patron is
>>> pledged, and contributes, but is not charged?
>>>
Suspended projects are not treated different as non-pledged and should
not show up specially. Notifications can be used to communicate all
details.
>>>
>>> I think the same critique applies. If this page is to show a history
>>> of participation, suspended projects need to show up.
>>>
* I also like keeping the history tab consistent with the running months
matching tab.
>>>
>>> +1.
>>>
>>> FYI, I have created a US to track this story, and have pasted in the
>>> mockups so far.
>>>
>>> https://tree.taiga.io/project/snowdrift/us/454
>>>
>>> I've named it according to my understanding that we are talking about
>>> a history of participation rather than just a history of payments, but
>>> please consider that point "open for discussion" still. :)
>>>
>>
>> Just to note: I agree with everything Bryan posted. The numbers should
>> be done in a way that's relatively standard. The purpose of the history
>> page is not just to focus on charges but to emphasize the amount of
>> support and the history of the matching.
>
> What is the difference of "charges", "history of matching" and
> "emphasize the amount of support" in that context?
> To me they easily translate all to the same.
>
> You seem to want some extra info that wouldn't be MVP.
>
Yes, I'm just saying that post-MVP we want to make sure history
emphasizes pride in being a long-term patron. The strict MVP could have
no history. The nice-for-MVP history is just the minimum you describe
that allows auditing ("okay you charged this and it went there, got it").
>>
>> Many projects that accept donations have a leader-board of sorts
>> honoring the folks who've donated the most to the project. I would like
>> to see that sort of thing post-MVP. It should especially honor at the
>> top those patrons who have supported for the longest time and emphasize
>> their time-length of support as the main item.
>>
>>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
Re: [Snowdrift-design] Mockup of account history
On 03.08.2016 10:31, Bryan Richter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:55:44AM +0200, Robert Martinez (mray) wrote: >> On 01.08.2016 23:30, Michael Siepmann wrote: >>> We discussed this in today's meeting. Here's a revised mockup, >>> also attached in .ods format. This shows payment processing fees, >>> two successive months of carry-over, and an example where a pledge >>> was suspended: >>> >> >> Thanks for clarifying via the mockup. I think it can be simplified >> in several ways: >> >> https://snowdrift.sylphs.net/prototypes/mray/#history_page >> >> * a pledge value/month next to a total/month isn't necessary. It >> only matters what you actually paid that month. So I would only show >> one sum/month. > > This is different from how all receipts and bills work, which show the > sum-of-goods subtotal, then any fees and taxes, then a final total. Do > we want to keep that just so it's more familiar? disclaimer: the actual numbers on the mockup can be considered random. I regard familiarity to receipts and bills documents relatively unimportant. Our mechanism is the driving force behind almost all financial transactions - this does not compare to anything I know of. We should focus on people understanding what the mechanism does, not how it works "under the hood". To be clear: I'm not promoting intransparency. There should be a gapless log of transactions, but that isn't the history in my eyes. > >> * items that did not contribute to a months spending can be omitted for >> clarity. > > Hm. I guess we should ask, is the purpose of this page to show *just* > payment history? I don't think so. I think it is a history of > participation within the mechanism. In that case, omitting items that > don't contribute leads to a *lack* of clarity. > I think this page should just show the payment history. We may offer a complete log elsewhere. @clearly indicating participation: A simple list of projects can probably illustrate participation in any given month most clearly. Since its almost only a log of binary choices. @omitting Example: *trying* to match many big projects without the necessary backup isn't even participation. It is only intended and doesn't help to clarify what actually happened. The key concerns when giving up control are the questions: "How much did they take?" "Where did it go?" The "why?" and "how?" are less interesting since you gave up control already and handed it over to us. > Also, our hope is that we will be able to sum up a patron's > contributions to all their projects, so they would only be hit by a > single payment charge. In that case, it is impossible to get charged > in April, but have other donations roll forward from April to May. > Either a patron contributes to *all* their projects in a month, or > they contribute to none of them. You're right. My mockups content isn't for real and makes no sense on that level. > > So: whether there is one project, or many projects, there is only one > thing that matters: What do we show for a month where a patron is > pledged, and contributes, but is not charged? > A simple note: "Your charge was just too low for the charging fee limit. We carried it over to next month." beneath that a big "0". Because "0" is what happened. >> Suspended projects are not treated different as non-pledged and should >> not show up specially. Notifications can be used to communicate all details. > > I think the same critique applies. If this page is to show a history > of participation, suspended projects need to show up. My rationale is as above: The special thing about suspended projects is their *lack* of participation. That is not to say the event can be neglected, but in terms of displaying participation it does not make sense to display "almost-paticipation". It should be the job of the notification system to warn and the job of a complete, gap-less log to document it. The reason I think the history should not do all those jobs is that I generally expect people not to care about gap-less documentation. They should get an easy to digest history of what happened before with their money. At least that is what I would expect. > >> * I also like keeping the history tab consistent with the running months >> matching tab. > > +1. > > FYI, I have created a US to track this story, and have pasted in the > mockups so far. > > https://tree.taiga.io/project/snowdrift/us/454 > > I've named it according to my understanding that we are talking about > a history of participation rather than just a history of payments, but > please consider that point "open for discussion" still. :) > > > > ___ > Design mailing list > Design@lists.snowdrift.coop > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
Re: [Snowdrift-design] Mockup of account history
On 08/03/2016 01:31 AM, Bryan Richter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:55:44AM +0200, Robert Martinez (mray) wrote: >> On 01.08.2016 23:30, Michael Siepmann wrote: >>> We discussed this in today's meeting. Here's a revised mockup, >>> also attached in .ods format. This shows payment processing fees, >>> two successive months of carry-over, and an example where a pledge >>> was suspended: >>> >> >> Thanks for clarifying via the mockup. I think it can be simplified >> in several ways: >> >> https://snowdrift.sylphs.net/prototypes/mray/#history_page >> >> * a pledge value/month next to a total/month isn't necessary. It >> only matters what you actually paid that month. So I would only show >> one sum/month. > > This is different from how all receipts and bills work, which show the > sum-of-goods subtotal, then any fees and taxes, then a final total. Do > we want to keep that just so it's more familiar? > >> * items that did not contribute to a months spending can be omitted for >> clarity. > > Hm. I guess we should ask, is the purpose of this page to show *just* > payment history? I don't think so. I think it is a history of > participation within the mechanism. In that case, omitting items that > don't contribute leads to a *lack* of clarity. > > Also, our hope is that we will be able to sum up a patron's > contributions to all their projects, so they would only be hit by a > single payment charge. In that case, it is impossible to get charged > in April, but have other donations roll forward from April to May. > Either a patron contributes to *all* their projects in a month, or > they contribute to none of them. > > So: whether there is one project, or many projects, there is only one > thing that matters: What do we show for a month where a patron is > pledged, and contributes, but is not charged? > >> Suspended projects are not treated different as non-pledged and should >> not show up specially. Notifications can be used to communicate all details. > > I think the same critique applies. If this page is to show a history > of participation, suspended projects need to show up. > >> * I also like keeping the history tab consistent with the running months >> matching tab. > > +1. > > FYI, I have created a US to track this story, and have pasted in the > mockups so far. > > https://tree.taiga.io/project/snowdrift/us/454 > > I've named it according to my understanding that we are talking about > a history of participation rather than just a history of payments, but > please consider that point "open for discussion" still. :) > Just to note: I agree with everything Bryan posted. The numbers should be done in a way that's relatively standard. The purpose of the history page is not just to focus on charges but to emphasize the amount of support and the history of the matching. Many projects that accept donations have a leader-board of sorts honoring the folks who've donated the most to the project. I would like to see that sort of thing post-MVP. It should especially honor at the top those patrons who have supported for the longest time and emphasize their time-length of support as the main item. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
