4 ms·

I addressed this pretty explicitly in my post. I agree with everything you're saying (intentionally frustrating users is bad), but I don't agree that a simple,

by csallen 13y ago

I addressed this pretty explicitly in my post. I agree with everything you're saying (intentionally frustrating users is bad), but I don't agree that a simple, straightforward form that can be filled out in under 10 seconds is an attempt to frustrate anyone. I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that a significant number of people, upon seeing this form, decided not to cancel because filling it out was too much a waste of time. It's just not a plausible argument. Another commenter mentioned going through hell attempting to cancel a gym membership. I've had the same thing happen to me: took multiple phone calls over the span of a few hours to cancel my Bally's membership. That was a deliberate attempt to frustrate. This form is several orders of magnitude better.

barrkel 13y ago
I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that a significant number of people, upon seeing this form, decided not to cancel because filling it out was too much a waste of time. It's just not a plausible argument. This isn't really something that is subject to argument; it's an empirical question. It's measurable; a known quantity to people who have implemented it in an A/B fashion. I'd be very surprised if additional friction to a cancel process had zero impact. That would be sufficiently surprising to be worthy of an article or paper.
- csallen 13y ago
  Not true. A simple A/B testing between having a form and not having one will tell you the "what" but not the "why". If I decide to cancel my account and end up on that form page, then change my mind and navigate away, you have no idea why. You cannot accurately claim that I did so because I was frustrated or because I thought it was a waste of time.
mikeash 13y ago
If filling out a form is not a big deal, then why isn't it optional? I'd have no problem with the form if you could just skip it and click Cancel at the bottom. But the moment you force users to fill out anything is the moment you turn evil. I agree that it's not anywhere near the same magnitude as it could be. But that doesn't make it OK.

by csallen 13y ago

barrkel 13y ago

I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that a significant number of people, upon seeing this form, decided not to cancel because filling it out was too much a waste of time. It's just not a plausible argument. This isn't really something that is subject to argument; it's an empirical question. It's measurable; a known quantity to people who have implemented it in an A/B fashion. I'd be very surprised if additional friction to a cancel process had zero impact. That would be sufficiently surprising to be worthy of an article or paper.

csallen 13y ago
Not true. A simple A/B testing between having a form and not having one will tell you the "what" but not the "why". If I decide to cancel my account and end up on that form page, then change my mind and navigate away, you have no idea why. You cannot accurately claim that I did so because I was frustrated or because I thought it was a waste of time.

mikeash 13y ago

If filling out a form is not a big deal, then why isn't it optional? I'd have no problem with the form if you could just skip it and click Cancel at the bottom. But the moment you force users to fill out anything is the moment you turn evil. I agree that it's not anywhere near the same magnitude as it could be. But that doesn't make it OK.