4 ms·

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.co

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.
        Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        I really hope you see the irony at some point that you're complaining about social elements in an inherently social page element: the comments section. And I didn't downvote your original comment, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Then again, I don't understand why people are sensitive about fake internet points to begin with.
        moe 14y ago
        And suddenly the formal "UX research" is out of the picture - now that was quick. irony ... complaining about social elements in an inherently social page element: the comments section. That statement makes no sense. So you wouldn't mind HN adding all sorts of widgets, because it was social to begin with? Further if you read the thread again you'll notice that nowhere did I complain about social elements per se.
        Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        How is formal UX research out of the picture? I asked you for some, you refused. If you're not going to even bother backing up your claim I'm not going to bother discussing it any more.
        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.
      - Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        I really hope you see the irony at some point that you're complaining about social elements in an inherently social page element: the comments section. And I didn't downvote your original comment, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Then again, I don't understand why people are sensitive about fake internet points to begin with.
        moe 14y ago
        And suddenly the formal "UX research" is out of the picture - now that was quick. irony ... complaining about social elements in an inherently social page element: the comments section. That statement makes no sense. So you wouldn't mind HN adding all sorts of widgets, because it was social to begin with? Further if you read the thread again you'll notice that nowhere did I complain about social elements per se.
        Pewpewarrows 14y ago
        How is formal UX research out of the picture? I asked you for some, you refused. If you're not going to even bother backing up your claim I'm not going to bother discussing it any more.
        14y ago