Re: [Snowdrift-design] Preliminary Review of Dashboard Prototype
I want to add one clarification (to the note I just sent): The remaining concern from a communication standpoint is that people not believe that they get to stick to a budget limit and bypass the matching pledge. Either they are matching or they aren't donating at all. But I no longer think there's any problem with system-wide vs budget-category / per-project budgets. As long as users understand that they are in or out of the crowdmatching, I have no other worries about their perceptions. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
Re: [Snowdrift-design] [Snowdrift-dev] Preliminary Review of Dashboard Prototype
On 07/30/2017 09:07 AM, Stephen Michel wrote:> Here's what I remember from the discussions a few months back: > > On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Jason Harrer > wrote: >> >> There are two major concerns with this part of the prototype: >> >> 1) This goes against the philosophies that Aaron has talked about >> numerous times, all the way back to when I first started on the >> project 3-4 years ago. He was strongly against the concept of >> applying a cap/limit at all. > > The objection was against a *per-project* limit, not a site-wide limit, > which I think everyone agrees is necessary to make people comfortable > with pledging (even if the "pledge amount explosion" scenario is not > very likely). > >> 2) There is currently no back-end support for a limit of any dollar >> amount. > > We knew this. Plan at the time being: > > - Adding a limit function in the backend is a priority > - Until we make an official announcement, we expect pledge numbers to be > low, so we should have plenty of time before we're getting enough money > to actually do a crowdmatch event. > - If for some reason we get to the point of doing a crowdmatch event > before the limit is implemented, we will enforce the limit manually > (just check to make sure nobody's being charged over $5. > I have a changed view on the limits and it's reflected in the simplified video script actually. I think a per-project limit isn't a fundamental problem or a misunderstanding we need to worry about. I see the limit plan like this: A. express that we *have* a budget limit and set it at $5 in the backend as a starting point B. make the limit adjustable system-wide (not an alpha requirement, but if someone decides to do this before the rest of alpha is complete, it's welcome enough) C. Long-term plan (in light of real-world alpha experience, and fine to express publicly as a long-term consideration): offer budget-categories that users can each define. Let users name a category and put any selected projects in it. This is comparable to folders/directories such as how a service like AuctionSniper lets users group a bunch of eBay items into a folder where you stop once you've won a set number. Because it's user-adjustable, they could make per-project budgets or choose to budget separate amounts for music, art, software, etc. as fits their priorities. The key point is that there's nothing wrong with C. So, for now we are FINE with just saying "there's a budget limit" and if someone says "oh, I can set a budget for each project?" the answer is "for now, it's just system-wide, but we hope to offer separate budgets like that eventually". (People could set up multiple accounts to get a similar effect anyway, but that would mean extra charge accounts, more charges and fees, and all the hassle of maintaining multiple accounts). In short: I've DROPPED my big worry about making sure people don't imagine per-project budgeting. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
Re: [Snowdrift-design] Preliminary Review of Dashboard Prototype
Here's what I remember from the discussions a few months back: On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Jason Harrer wrote: There are two major concerns with this part of the prototype: 1) This goes against the philosophies that Aaron has talked about numerous times, all the way back to when I first started on the project 3-4 years ago. He was strongly against the concept of applying a cap/limit at all. The objection was against a *per-project* limit, not a site-wide limit, which I think everyone agrees is necessary to make people comfortable with pledging (even if the "pledge amount explosion" scenario is not very likely). 2) There is currently no back-end support for a limit of any dollar amount. We knew this. Plan at the time being: - Adding a limit function in the backend is a priority - Until we make an official announcement, we expect pledge numbers to be low, so we should have plenty of time before we're getting enough money to actually do a crowdmatch event. - If for some reason we get to the point of doing a crowdmatch event before the limit is implemented, we will enforce the limit manually (just check to make sure nobody's being charged over $5. ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
Re: [Snowdrift-design] Preliminary Review of Dashboard Prototype
On 30.07.2017 07:32, Jason Harrer wrote: > Hello, all - > > Sending to both Design & Dev mailing lists, as the discussion applies to > both teams, and being that I can't make the weekly meetings (and seldom > have time to read the minutes), I figured it best to have the discussion > via the mailing lists. > > With the SASS work underway (thanks to fr33's diligent patching and iko's > diligent updating), I began work this evening reviewing how to start > getting the dashboard page moving forward. In particular, I wanted to > validate that all of the requested data that is on the prototype can in > fact be obtained. It turns out that we need to review a big elephant in > the room once again. > > For reference, the prototype for the Dashboard can be viewed at > https://snowdrift.sylphs.net/prototypes/alpha/dashboard/ I know mray is > working on some updates here and there, but I don't think his updates > included any plans on changing the piece that is the topic of this e-mail. > > Under the Matches tab is a big red box that says "Monthly Limit". This is > apparently to reflect a user's ability to limit how much money a user is > willing to pay out per month at the most. > > There are two major concerns with this part of the prototype: > > 1) This goes against the philosophies that Aaron has talked about numerous > times, all the way back to when I first started on the project 3-4 years > ago. He was strongly against the concept of applying a cap/limit at all. > Iko thinks there was a decision change somewhere along the way in meetings > whereby there was an agreement to create a $5 limit for each user during > the alpha stage. Being that I haven't been involved in meetings since the > date/time change (as it conflicts with a standing weekly meeting for my day > job), I can't really comment on that either way. I'd like to make sure > that everyone is in agreement that this is indeed a function that we wish > to have, though, as that decision impacts next steps on moving forward (as > outlined below in the summary). > > 2) There is currently no back-end support for a limit of any dollar > amount. There isn't even a data element for such a limit to be stored > within the database at all (not that I can see, anyway). Setting up such > logic, to the best of my foresight, would most likely entail updates to > both the website logic (allowing the user to set their limit, limiting the > amount a user can pledge to projects, etc.) as well as crowdmatch logic > (ensuring that the total amount we're trying to charge the user doesn't > exceed their limit... Which theoretically should never happen if the > website logic works properly to ensure the total we attempt to charge > doesn't exceed their limit, but it's always good to double check just in > case there's a bug somwhere...). Such Development work is outside of my > comfort zone and would have to rely on another Haskeller to have time to > make updates,. > > > That being said, we need to discuss whether the Design team needs to remove > the limit button/verbiage and adjust the meter to not reflect the limit > from the prototype - OR - if the Development team needs to make the > appropriate updates in order to support limit functionality. > > Any questions, please ask away. > > Thanks!! > > - Jason (JazzyEagle) > > I'm not well informed about the exact current status from the code side. My latest info on that matter is: There would be a hard 5$ limit, without any way to change that. Adding an adjustable limit would have to be implemented later on. In terms of design this means a button is grayed out, and there is some text that explains why it isn't working yet. If it turns out we don't have any limit whatsoever I expect a very bad impact on our credibility due to the hypothetical case of a pledge amount explosion. You say there is no hard 5$ limit. How hard is it to implement that? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
