Bad UX is keeping the majority of people away from Lemmy
-
I do the same on mobile
but I think once people do understand federation and why its actually a very good idea they would too - but thats not going to be true of the majority - certainly not before they use a federated service. -
When it comes to software things, I do tend to err on the side of supporting new users - I'll be the first to argue that a person should not have to learn how to use the terminal in order to use Linux.
That said, this situation is honestly bewildering to me. I cannot fathom how the idea of having choices could be considered, let alone by so many people to even make this into a controversy, to be bad design. That's the very thing that makes federation great.
You're all seriously overthinking this. Just look at a few of the most populated sites, and pick one that looks good. The choice makes 95% no difference in practice because on most instances you're going to see all the same content as soon as you press the All button anyway.
One thing I can imagine that would make the experience better, is maybe if there was a one-click way to join or migrate to another lemmy instance, using an existing login. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to just quickly sign up for a new instance if I want to. But I did see that Pixelfed has the option of signing on by using a Mastodon account. So maybe something like that can help?
-
They didn’t, they signed up for gmail.
-
But that's not great. It's great if you're not interested in a social networking forum and want a meme feed sure but I don't. I want people, I want the damaged ego people and I want to ask and talk to them about how they ended up like that
-
For the majority of commenters: UX is not UI.
The poor UX experience is the research a person has to do before they can even participate. You need to have a basic understanding of how the network works, and then you have to shop around for a server.
It’s enough friction to prevent people from on-boarding and that’s not good for a platform that needs people to be valuable.
-
I doubt they even know there's anything other than gmail.
-
I get you.
But honestly come I'm kind of liking the vibe here and it's not just a meme feed. More often than not you can have a real conversation with somebody you disagree with, you concied, they concied, learn a little bit about each other, follow a couple people maybe block a few assholes.
The first few redis exoduses filled the place with the people with the lowest tolerance for bullshit. Every time Reddit has a new Exodus, We get topped off with the next level of people that just want to watch everyone be pissed off.
-
That's UI. What they're talking about is the barrier to entry for new users, which falls under User eXperience
-
I am aware of the difference
I was only commenting on one part of it
-
Maybe this is a terrible thing to say, but I actually like that registering for federated sites requires a bit work.
IMO, the internet was more enjoyable when it was just full of us nerds
-
Maybe it’s personal bias but I’d put a lot more weight into the comments about
- too few members
- wtf is multiple servers?
While I understand the power, the ideal of multiple federated servers, I still see it as an impediment for use. I know there’s online descriptions but I fail to see why I need to research and choose a server, especially when none really have the membership to support smaller communities yet
-
The question is: do we want people to leave corporate services, and join the fediverse, or not? By showing such hostility towards such "crybabies" we will never get any traction.
We are facing a problem. "Crybabies" are arguing about lack of content and/or difficulty on signing up. People on Lemmy are arguing that they don't want such users in their communities. Other people, thinking of onboarding, may not join after seeing hostile users like you.
-
"I cannot fathom how the idea of having choices could be considered, let alone by so many people to even make this into a controversy, to be bad design. That's the very thing that makes federation great."
Because for every choice presented, people want to know the consequences of each one before proceeding. It's a well understood problem in sales and marketing. People do not want to put themselves in a position where they have to undo. Companies like Apple do this very well. In computer shops, the reason staff are hired is to help get the customer from "wanting a laptop" to "choosing one laptop", rather than walk away feeling that they need to think about it more.
"Just look at a few of the most populated sites, and pick one that looks good. The choice makes 95% no difference in practice".
Maybe if they said that on the signup page it would help. I think it would have helped me. But just because you have a sense of what "looks good" doesn't mean the average person does. It's the average person that I want to interact with on the internet.
-
simply spin the wheel
That’s how the Lemmy info page (what comes up when you search for “Lemmy”) does it, and the experience isn’t great.
Before I knew how Lemmy worked I just clicked the first option it showed, which (for me) was a non-English instance. The second option was that LGBT-focused instance that defederated with lemmy.world a few months ago. Of course I didn’t know anything about either community so I just picked randomly. I went right back to Reddit until they pulled the next anti-user thing.
-
That does come with the unavoidable side effect that the majority of the people will simply not participate. It then follows that sites like Reddit will continue to be the place where the majority of the people will go.
If your goal is to participate in small communities and you are okay with the slow pace of those communities, then that's fine. If your goal is to move people away from corporate-sponsored media for whatever reason, then this won't work.
-
donald glover saying good dot gif
-
When I recommend federated sites to people, I literally just pick the ones I'm already on and send the link. Problem solved. They can learn more and try new things in their own time. It's also not hard to just tell them, "It's like email, but for the whole internet."
"Of Earth’s estimated 400,000 plant species, we could eat some 300,000, armed with the right imagination, boldness and preparation. Yet humans, possibly the supreme generalist, eat a mere 200 species globally, and half our plant-sourced protein and calories come from just three: maize, rice and wheat."
Would you consider biodiversity to also be bad ux? Maybe consider that the benefits of decentralization far outweigh the cons of your marketing programming, and that the issue is more one of education. Dumbing down and patronizing people like we need somebody to make our choices for us sounds like a solution that's worse than the problem.
-
Good UI (in my android app) is the reason I came to Lemmy.
-
Yes, that would be a good addition to the Lemmy ecosystem.
What I'm saying is, you can't agree that we should help them avoid extremist instances AND say that the instance doesn't matter.
-
Is it really a "bad" experience?
A "bad" experience is something like applying for a job online, submitting your resume, then manually entering all the information that's already on your resume into a thousand little boxes. A "bad" experience is trying to unsubscribe from a service that relies on the pain of that unsubscribe process keeping people paying every month.
Having to choose a server is at most a speed bump. Is it a "bad" experience to choose an email provider?
If that mild speed bump is keeping people from joining, that's fine. If someone cared enough to make some kind of a GUI that hand-held people through the process of choosing a server, that's fine too.
IMO, if we're talking bad experiences, ads on Reddit that are designed to look like posts, that's a bad experience. Ads that are designed to look like comments, that's a bad experience. And, the feature coming soon of communities locked behind a paywall, that's a really bad experience.
