10 ms·

"It soured my opinion of the whole article before I even read it" Seriously? The fact that an embedded video started playing soured your opinion of the article

by dkrich 14y ago

"It soured my opinion of the whole article before I even read it" Seriously? The fact that an embedded video started playing soured your opinion of the article? Maybe you guys should chill out a bit. Sometimes comments like this lead me to believe the author wants recognition at somebody else's expense.

bluetidepro 14y ago
I'm not saying I didn't read the article because of it but it does just start the article off with a bit of annoyance. You can't argue that anywhere you enjoy going in the online or physical world is determined by emotional responses. Imagine when you got to a restaurant that has music annoying loud. You may still enjoy the dinner food, but you had a bad experience eating the good food because you were annoyed with the music. That scenario similar to this article. You could still enjoy the article content but you were annoyed because of the bad experience. And after so many of those bad experiences you may just think "you know what, I'd rather eat somewhere not as good just because I won't be annoyed by loud music." If you don't think that small things like this (that can easily add up over time) do change how your viewers see your site/company (regardless of the content), then you need to think again. However, I could be wrong. I mean, everyone did love the animated images, colors, and sounds on GeoCities which lead to their industry takeover and incredible success. ;)
- dkrich 14y ago
  "However, I could be wrong. I mean, everyone did love the animated images, colors, and sounds on GeoCities which lead to their industry takeover and incredible success." Let's not just assume that all annoyances are created equal. One is an integrally bad user experience, the only way out of which is to stop using the service wholesale. The other amounts to mousing-over a large area of the screen and clicking a button.
  - bluetidepro 14y ago
    Fair enough. I will give you that. It was a bit of a extreme on that example. But I imagine you do understand what I generally mean about the small things having the ability to add up.
chollida1 14y ago
> Seriously? The fact that an embedded video started playing soured your opinion of the article? Sure, what's wrong with that opinion. I don't know how you browse but when I browse hacker news I'll open up 2-3 articles and their associated comments and start reading one. When a video starts playing in the background when I'm not even on that tab, then yes, it can sour your opinion of the entire website. Little things matter.
- dkrich 14y ago
  That's your interpretation based on your use. I do not browse that way. I pick one maybe two that look interesting and read them. I find the autoplay useful. See that? Two different interpretations of the same feature. Just because you hate autoplay doesn't mean everyone does. Certainly one or the other does not "sour my opinion" of an article. The fact that the video starts playing when the page loads has exactly nothing to do with the content in the article. That's what's wrong with the opinion.
  - tsahyt 14y ago
    Browsing habits aside, I find something else annoying about it. When I click on the article, and the video sits in the middle of the page with text above it, I want to read the text until I reach the video, then watch the video, then continue with the text below it. As soon as the video starts, reading is disturbed. To me it completely kills the "flow" of the article. And just my two cents: There is nothing wrong with any opinion. It's an opinion after all isn't it? An opinion is not a universal truth. It's something personal that people like to share for some reason. That what makes discussion so hard at times.
  - chollida1 14y ago
    > See that? Two different interpretations of the same feature. Just because you hate autoplay doesn't mean everyone does. Sure, all that makes perfect sense. None of that invalidates anything that I said though:)

by dkrich 14y ago

bluetidepro 14y ago

I'm not saying I didn't read the article because of it but it does just start the article off with a bit of annoyance. You can't argue that anywhere you enjoy going in the online or physical world is determined by emotional responses. Imagine when you got to a restaurant that has music annoying loud. You may still enjoy the dinner food, but you had a bad experience eating the good food because you were annoyed with the music. That scenario similar to this article. You could still enjoy the article content but you were annoyed because of the bad experience. And after so many of those bad experiences you may just think "you know what, I'd rather eat somewhere not as good just because I won't be annoyed by loud music." If you don't think that small things like this (that can easily add up over time) do change how your viewers see your site/company (regardless of the content), then you need to think again. However, I could be wrong. I mean, everyone did love the animated images, colors, and sounds on GeoCities which lead to their industry takeover and incredible success. ;)

dkrich 14y ago
"However, I could be wrong. I mean, everyone did love the animated images, colors, and sounds on GeoCities which lead to their industry takeover and incredible success." Let's not just assume that all annoyances are created equal. One is an integrally bad user experience, the only way out of which is to stop using the service wholesale. The other amounts to mousing-over a large area of the screen and clicking a button.
- bluetidepro 14y ago
  Fair enough. I will give you that. It was a bit of a extreme on that example. But I imagine you do understand what I generally mean about the small things having the ability to add up.

chollida1 14y ago

> Seriously? The fact that an embedded video started playing soured your opinion of the article? Sure, what's wrong with that opinion. I don't know how you browse but when I browse hacker news I'll open up 2-3 articles and their associated comments and start reading one. When a video starts playing in the background when I'm not even on that tab, then yes, it can sour your opinion of the entire website. Little things matter.

dkrich 14y ago
That's your interpretation based on your use. I do not browse that way. I pick one maybe two that look interesting and read them. I find the autoplay useful. See that? Two different interpretations of the same feature. Just because you hate autoplay doesn't mean everyone does. Certainly one or the other does not "sour my opinion" of an article. The fact that the video starts playing when the page loads has exactly nothing to do with the content in the article. That's what's wrong with the opinion.
- tsahyt 14y ago
  Browsing habits aside, I find something else annoying about it. When I click on the article, and the video sits in the middle of the page with text above it, I want to read the text until I reach the video, then watch the video, then continue with the text below it. As soon as the video starts, reading is disturbed. To me it completely kills the "flow" of the article. And just my two cents: There is nothing wrong with any opinion. It's an opinion after all isn't it? An opinion is not a universal truth. It's something personal that people like to share for some reason. That what makes discussion so hard at times.
- chollida1 14y ago
  > See that? Two different interpretations of the same feature. Just because you hate autoplay doesn't mean everyone does. Sure, all that makes perfect sense. None of that invalidates anything that I said though:)