4 ms·

No, this is fine for what this is, essentially a library catalogue. I prefer this over the pushy this is what others are reading type of interface as I tend to

No, this is fine for what this is, essentially a library catalogue. I prefer this over the pushy this is what others are reading type of interface as I tend to access these catalogues knowing what I'm looking for. If I want to know what others are reading/listening to I'll go to a book recommendation site or forum and take it from there. Library catalogues should be neutral, just show what is on offer and leave the popularity contest to others.

hombre_fatal 1y ago
But you already have a search box and alphabetical list if that's what gets you excited. What about the rest of us? Building a featured or popular section is basic UX and creates a nice call to action to let the visitor see what they can expect without browsing to see if the site has any books they want. Even my local library puts more work into their homepage with a featured reads section. So disappointing when nobody cares about UX or holds minority HNer views like "a featured list on the homepage is bad and pushy–I quite like alphabetical lists myself".
- mxuribe 1y ago
  Maybe your comments didn't meant to come off like those people who complain about volunteer efforts, and maybe you legitamately meant them in goodwill...but, have you considered submitting this as feedback directly at the project - instead of on HN? What might seem obvious to you, may not seem obvious to the *volunteers* of this effort. (Or, maybe they address this aspect within their forums - i honestly don't know?) Maybe send some feedback and suggestions - in a respectful manner - to the volunteers who manage this effort, so that, they can consider your suggestions?
  - hombre_fatal 1y ago
    Hey, maybe you're right about that. I was feeling pretty mischievous when I made that original comment. If someone were to do that, one idea is to pitch is that they can inline some different LibriVox recommendation lists on the homepage: https://www.google.com/search?q=librivox+book+recommendations https://www.google.com/search?q=librivox+book+recommendation... Doesn't even involve a DB query. Maybe store 10 lists in JS/HTML and randomly pick one on every homepage page load. For a project that depends on thousands of hours of donated content from strangers, 10 minutes of work on the homepage to promote some high quality donations isn't a big ask. That's a decent thing to remind them of when they resist the suggestion.
- hagbard_c 1y ago
  Feel free to make or sponsor a recommendation site which provides the features you requested. If you build or sponsor it and enough people agree with the need for such a site they will come flocking to it. If you think Librivox really needs this feature you may be able to convince them by submitting code or funds to produce code to implement it.
- Barbing 1y ago
  Yes to the reply by mx, and— I’d find this (speaking of!) engaging, with just three changes: >Hey, anybody at LibriVox considered curating a "Featured reads" section or making a "Popular reads" section for the homepage? Fitting for random HN commenters such as ourselves :) edit: typo
- BeetleB 1y ago
  I mirror the sentiments: I prefer not having these on their page, and would prefer individuals/other orgs make their own curated list of "good listens on LibriVox". > What about the rest of us? His/my suggestion satisfies your need. Just Google "Librivox audiobook recommendations". > Even my local library puts more work into their homepage with a featured reads section. They're getting paid. You're asking the folks behind LibriVox to have a good sense of what's good on their site. Do they have that bandwidth (and this is a recurring task forever)?
  - hombre_fatal 1y ago
    This thread reminds me why UX is so bad on most services. Most developers think of MX (My Experience), not UX. You're okay with going to different websites to find a book you might want to listen to. So everyone else should prefer that experience. Or, you could write a database query that finds the top 5 reads in 5 genres that runs once a week for the homepage. Or you can copy a few of those book recommendations onto the homepage and give people a nice place to start clicking around (great idea). All this resistance in the replies to a tiny bit of consideration for the website visitor just reveals another piece to the puzzle of why good UX is so rare. I've brought this up in the last couple comments, but it really is like listening to people go to war defending why they don't need a README for their Github repo. Except in LibriVox's case, it's a repo that everyone else spent hours of their life contributing to. Just make the dang README. Promote a few volunteer contributions.
    - BeetleB 1y ago
      > Most developers think of MX (My Experience), not UX. Yes, yes and yes. I don't know how long you've been around, but in the (earlier) days of open source, this was very explicit: Open source authors are writing to solve their problem, not their users' problems. If they go out of their way to solve other people's problems, that's certainly nice, but not to be expected. This was very explicit, and well understood. We're not arguing with you that having a well curated list is a bad idea from a user's perspective. We're pointing out that doing it well is work, and doing it poorly does make things worse. We don't want people burnt out, so we don't want to push for this. > Or, you could write a database query that finds the top 5 reads in 5 genres that runs once a week for the homepage. This is the opposite of a well curated list. In my experience, such lists based on raw numbers leads to a poorer experience. There's a reason HN doesn't follow this approach. > Except in LibriVox's case, it's a repo that everyone else spent hours of their life contributing to. Just make the dang README. Promote a few volunteer contributions. Talk is cheap. Do you want to spend the time making a curated list? If so, go forth and volunteer!

hombre_fatal 1y ago

But you already have a search box and alphabetical list if that's what gets you excited. What about the rest of us? Building a featured or popular section is basic UX and creates a nice call to action to let the visitor see what they can expect without browsing to see if the site has any books they want. Even my local library puts more work into their homepage with a featured reads section. So disappointing when nobody cares about UX or holds minority HNer views like "a featured list on the homepage is bad and pushy–I quite like alphabetical lists myself".

mxuribe 1y ago
Maybe your comments didn't meant to come off like those people who complain about volunteer efforts, and maybe you legitamately meant them in goodwill...but, have you considered submitting this as feedback directly at the project - instead of on HN? What might seem obvious to you, may not seem obvious to the *volunteers* of this effort. (Or, maybe they address this aspect within their forums - i honestly don't know?) Maybe send some feedback and suggestions - in a respectful manner - to the volunteers who manage this effort, so that, they can consider your suggestions?
- hombre_fatal 1y ago
  Hey, maybe you're right about that. I was feeling pretty mischievous when I made that original comment. If someone were to do that, one idea is to pitch is that they can inline some different LibriVox recommendation lists on the homepage: https://www.google.com/search?q=librivox+book+recommendations https://www.google.com/search?q=librivox+book+recommendation... Doesn't even involve a DB query. Maybe store 10 lists in JS/HTML and randomly pick one on every homepage page load. For a project that depends on thousands of hours of donated content from strangers, 10 minutes of work on the homepage to promote some high quality donations isn't a big ask. That's a decent thing to remind them of when they resist the suggestion.
hagbard_c 1y ago
Feel free to make or sponsor a recommendation site which provides the features you requested. If you build or sponsor it and enough people agree with the need for such a site they will come flocking to it. If you think Librivox really needs this feature you may be able to convince them by submitting code or funds to produce code to implement it.
Barbing 1y ago
Yes to the reply by mx, and— I’d find this (speaking of!) engaging, with just three changes: >Hey, anybody at LibriVox considered curating a "Featured reads" section or making a "Popular reads" section for the homepage? Fitting for random HN commenters such as ourselves :) edit: typo
BeetleB 1y ago
I mirror the sentiments: I prefer not having these on their page, and would prefer individuals/other orgs make their own curated list of "good listens on LibriVox". > What about the rest of us? His/my suggestion satisfies your need. Just Google "Librivox audiobook recommendations". > Even my local library puts more work into their homepage with a featured reads section. They're getting paid. You're asking the folks behind LibriVox to have a good sense of what's good on their site. Do they have that bandwidth (and this is a recurring task forever)?
- hombre_fatal 1y ago
  This thread reminds me why UX is so bad on most services. Most developers think of MX (My Experience), not UX. You're okay with going to different websites to find a book you might want to listen to. So everyone else should prefer that experience. Or, you could write a database query that finds the top 5 reads in 5 genres that runs once a week for the homepage. Or you can copy a few of those book recommendations onto the homepage and give people a nice place to start clicking around (great idea). All this resistance in the replies to a tiny bit of consideration for the website visitor just reveals another piece to the puzzle of why good UX is so rare. I've brought this up in the last couple comments, but it really is like listening to people go to war defending why they don't need a README for their Github repo. Except in LibriVox's case, it's a repo that everyone else spent hours of their life contributing to. Just make the dang README. Promote a few volunteer contributions.
  - BeetleB 1y ago
    > Most developers think of MX (My Experience), not UX. Yes, yes and yes. I don't know how long you've been around, but in the (earlier) days of open source, this was very explicit: Open source authors are writing to solve their problem, not their users' problems. If they go out of their way to solve other people's problems, that's certainly nice, but not to be expected. This was very explicit, and well understood. We're not arguing with you that having a well curated list is a bad idea from a user's perspective. We're pointing out that doing it well is work, and doing it poorly does make things worse. We don't want people burnt out, so we don't want to push for this. > Or, you could write a database query that finds the top 5 reads in 5 genres that runs once a week for the homepage. This is the opposite of a well curated list. In my experience, such lists based on raw numbers leads to a poorer experience. There's a reason HN doesn't follow this approach. > Except in LibriVox's case, it's a repo that everyone else spent hours of their life contributing to. Just make the dang README. Promote a few volunteer contributions. Talk is cheap. Do you want to spend the time making a curated list? If so, go forth and volunteer!