7 ms·

The new disqus feels very much like the users are actually disqus users that happen to be commenting on your site. Not your users talking on your site. I'd put

The new disqus feels very much like the users are actually disqus users that happen to be commenting on your site. Not your users talking on your site. I'd put this on a fun site or a site I did not care very much about, but on a business related site, I'd want to control my own users and not hand them all over to disqus.

Karunamon 14y ago
"hand them all over to disqus" What possible benefit do you get by having users login on your site as opposed to a disqus frame? Other than the "feel"?
slig 14y ago
They have VIP features where you can use your own login system.
moe 14y ago
Agreed. They should get rid of that huge navigation bar. The last thing I want on my site/blog/whatever is additional, official-looking navigation buttons driving the user away from my site. There's no reason for such a clumsy, intrusive widget. Disqus has plenty opportunity to brand the user within the registration popup already. A tiny button with a popup-menu would serve their goals better. The current design will definitely turn off precisely the webmasters that would have been the most likely to consider a paid plan.
- bentlegen 14y ago
  The demo and screenshots on disqus.com are a little behind our latest design - but the nav bar has been toned down a lot. Take a look on avc.com or slashfilm.com.
  - moe 14y ago
    Frankly, not impressed at all. I took the liberty to fix it for you; http://cl.ly/1d2T3S0B0G3F3j343q2g http://cl.ly/1d2T3S0B0G3F3j343q2g The user just wants to see the comments and possibly add his own. The user doesn't want to learn why there is a "Comments"- and a "Reactions"-tab and what the difference is. The user doesn't want to be bothered with yet another meaningless star-gauge. The user doesn't care about your "community". None of that clutter provides any value. It's just noise.
    - untog 14y ago
      Are you sure you're not just substituting "I" with "the user" in there? I'm going to give Disqus the benefit of the doubt and say that they have user tested their new design. By what criteria do you say that "the user" (which is a neat getaround for saying the unprovable "all users") doesn't care for these things?
      - moe 14y ago
        By the common-sense criteria. We've seen the cycle countless times. $Company damages their product in an attempt to create "social lockin", without realizing the futility of trying to compete with the established social networks. This is then inevitably followed by either a quiet rollback, or a less cluttered competitor eating their lunch. I like disqus and sympathize with their efforts to find a business model, but they're not going to be an exception here.
        Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        > By the common-sense criteria. Stopped reading right here. Either provide UX research to back up your claims, or stop pretending that they apply to your mythical invention of "the user."
        moe 14y ago
        UX Research, eh? Let's just say your downvote on the original comment didn't make a dent, so much for a quick, unrepresentative poll. What I call Common Sense is ultimately no more than the essence of past UX research and can be obtained by a mere glance at what prevails in the grand petri dish. Cf. Altavista/Google, Myspace/Facebook, and the rise of Apple for just a few major case studies in the area of UI clutter. With regard to the siren-song of social-lockin I'll recommend to study the fate of Ping, which exemplifies what happens when even the big guys try to go against the grain. If you find a piece of formal "UX Research" claiming anything else then I'd be curious to see it.
        14y ago
bonaldi 14y ago
This is a huge advantage. I want to be a disqus user, not a user of 4000 tiny blogs. When I make comments on x, y and z random blogs, I want to be able to follow replies to them in one central place. I especially don't want to give a username and password to all these little poorly-secured blogs. If you want to "control" "your" users, build your own comments system. And turn off RSS.
- simonbrown 14y ago
  > I especially don't want to give a username and password to all these little poorly-secured blogs. How many blogs require you to create a blog to post? > And turn off RSS. What's wrong with RSS?
  - bonaldi 14y ago
    Nearly all blogs require you to authenticate with some kind of account. The alternative is spam city. RSS: There's nothing wrong with it. But if you object to Disqus centralising "your" users, you should equally object to eg Google Reader centralising them. It's exactly the same principle. You lose "control", to the benefit of the user.
- cema 14y ago
  I want to be a disqus user, not a user of 4000 tiny blogs. Yes! And in addition to the above arguments, I would say, having a single identity across a variety of sites may be convenient.
mediasavvy 14y ago
Relationship with my commenters always been an issue for me when I've considered Disqus. I'm sure I'm not the only site owner who requires real names and cultivates community among his commenters. Having said that, Disqus looks like an excellent solution for the vast majority of sites, where the quality of the comments and sense of community is very low indeed.

Karunamon 14y ago

"hand them all over to disqus" What possible benefit do you get by having users login on your site as opposed to a disqus frame? Other than the "feel"?

slig 14y ago

They have VIP features where you can use your own login system.

moe 14y ago

Agreed. They should get rid of that huge navigation bar. The last thing I want on my site/blog/whatever is additional, official-looking navigation buttons driving the user away from my site. There's no reason for such a clumsy, intrusive widget. Disqus has plenty opportunity to brand the user within the registration popup already. A tiny button with a popup-menu would serve their goals better. The current design will definitely turn off precisely the webmasters that would have been the most likely to consider a paid plan.

bentlegen 14y ago
The demo and screenshots on disqus.com are a little behind our latest design - but the nav bar has been toned down a lot. Take a look on avc.com or slashfilm.com.
- moe 14y ago
  Frankly, not impressed at all. I took the liberty to fix it for you; http://cl.ly/1d2T3S0B0G3F3j343q2g http://cl.ly/1d2T3S0B0G3F3j343q2g The user just wants to see the comments and possibly add his own. The user doesn't want to learn why there is a "Comments"- and a "Reactions"-tab and what the difference is. The user doesn't want to be bothered with yet another meaningless star-gauge. The user doesn't care about your "community". None of that clutter provides any value. It's just noise.
  - untog 14y ago
    Are you sure you're not just substituting "I" with "the user" in there? I'm going to give Disqus the benefit of the doubt and say that they have user tested their new design. By what criteria do you say that "the user" (which is a neat getaround for saying the unprovable "all users") doesn't care for these things?
    - moe 14y ago
      By the common-sense criteria. We've seen the cycle countless times. $Company damages their product in an attempt to create "social lockin", without realizing the futility of trying to compete with the established social networks. This is then inevitably followed by either a quiet rollback, or a less cluttered competitor eating their lunch. I like disqus and sympathize with their efforts to find a business model, but they're not going to be an exception here.
      - Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        > By the common-sense criteria. Stopped reading right here. Either provide UX research to back up your claims, or stop pretending that they apply to your mythical invention of "the user."
        moe 14y ago
        UX Research, eh? Let's just say your downvote on the original comment didn't make a dent, so much for a quick, unrepresentative poll. What I call Common Sense is ultimately no more than the essence of past UX research and can be obtained by a mere glance at what prevails in the grand petri dish. Cf. Altavista/Google, Myspace/Facebook, and the rise of Apple for just a few major case studies in the area of UI clutter. With regard to the siren-song of social-lockin I'll recommend to study the fate of Ping, which exemplifies what happens when even the big guys try to go against the grain. If you find a piece of formal "UX Research" claiming anything else then I'd be curious to see it.
        14y ago

bonaldi 14y ago

This is a huge advantage. I want to be a disqus user, not a user of 4000 tiny blogs. When I make comments on x, y and z random blogs, I want to be able to follow replies to them in one central place. I especially don't want to give a username and password to all these little poorly-secured blogs. If you want to "control" "your" users, build your own comments system. And turn off RSS.

simonbrown 14y ago
> I especially don't want to give a username and password to all these little poorly-secured blogs. How many blogs require you to create a blog to post? > And turn off RSS. What's wrong with RSS?
- bonaldi 14y ago
  Nearly all blogs require you to authenticate with some kind of account. The alternative is spam city. RSS: There's nothing wrong with it. But if you object to Disqus centralising "your" users, you should equally object to eg Google Reader centralising them. It's exactly the same principle. You lose "control", to the benefit of the user.
cema 14y ago
I want to be a disqus user, not a user of 4000 tiny blogs. Yes! And in addition to the above arguments, I would say, having a single identity across a variety of sites may be convenient.

mediasavvy 14y ago

Relationship with my commenters always been an issue for me when I've considered Disqus. I'm sure I'm not the only site owner who requires real names and cultivates community among his commenters. Having said that, Disqus looks like an excellent solution for the vast majority of sites, where the quality of the comments and sense of community is very low indeed.