3 ms·

I appreciate the candor that Aline has shown in this write up. >Practically speaking, I’ve learned that creating some amount of friction is necessary when you’

I appreciate the candor that Aline has shown in this write up. >Practically speaking, I’ve learned that creating some amount of friction is necessary when you’re asking people to promise to pay you ~$1000 in the future. Removing that friction can create short-term wins but may hurt you (and disappoint your users) in the long run. But people are going to be confused from a "click this button and you owe us a grand" UI seems blindingly obvious. I suspect they got greedy and thought it wouldn't going to be as big of a deal as it turned out to be.

librish 4y ago
I think that's an uncharitable way of reading this. Looking at the UI the TLDR is pretty clear, plus there's the friction of putting down a credit card.
- treis 4y ago
  It depends on what the screen before this one looked like. I'd definitely blow pass the TCs they showed. So it would have to have been very explicit in the screen before that you were agreeing to pay something.
  - librish 4y ago
    You would put down your credit card on a website without reading anything on the page? Why?
    - treis 4y ago
      Because most T&Cs are boilerplate nonsense Because I have CC disputes as a backup Because I'm lazy
      - librish 4y ago
        OK but this wasn't a 40 page T&C, this was a text box with three statements. What would you think you were getting when putting in your credit card?
awillen 4y ago
Feels to me like a boiling frog situation - they probably started with something reasonable and made a series of incremental changes, each of which didn't make it drastically worse, but by the end it looked nothing like how it started.