3 ms·
That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/unc
by joebadmo 15y ago
That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/uncertainty there that equals friction to every secondary action (like a comment).
So there's two problems: 1. Bob might comment on Alice's post thinking he's in his own social context, which is reinforced by the fact that on Google+, he's in his own UI and Alice's post shows up in his Circle; 2. Bob has to consciously check to see what the context is every time he wants to make a comment on Alice's post.
My idea for a potential solution is "Places." Which is through the link I posted above.
- esrauch 15y agoGoogle already has a product named Places (I think it's kind of like Yelp?), but I get your meaning.
- michaelchisari 15y agoIn Appleseed, you can set a Circle to be viewable by it's members, so it's similar in function to how you describe "Places".
- joebadmo 15y agoIt's the same in Google+, but you still have to consciously check. My point being that it's not really the functionality that matters per se, it's the metaphor. Having the explicit metaphor gives you an immediate understanding of how the information flows. Having an optional setting checked does not.