2 ms·

>, I challenge you to discover a "revealed preference" that says they like overlays. That's not my position. I never proposed that web surfers "like" modal ov

by jasode 11y ago

>, I challenge you to discover a "revealed preference" that says they like overlays. That's not my position. I never proposed that web surfers "like" modal overlays. I think we can all agree that intrusive overlays annoy everyone. The "revealed preference" I'm talking about isn't referencing the modal overlays specifically. The RP reference is to the "whole story" (to put it in author's words). To me, the "whole story" is how the website measures the value of its content, how it monetizes it, what % of people never want to return, what is a sustainable audience, etc, etc. There are multiple dimensions to what people "like/dislike" and people assign different (and hidden) weights to them. The author wrote: >They will falsely conclude that people love these modal overlays. I've never heard any sane UI developer or programmer expound that position. That looks like twisting the words of what they actually think (aka a straw man). The actual conclusion by them is more accurately portrayed as, "they conclude that greater % people love THE CONTENT MORE THAN THE INCONVENIENCES of these modal overlays. The % of people who tc;dr is real but small enough % to be acceptable collateral damage." The RP behavior analysis attempts to answer that second thesis. Surveys and questionnaires are the wrong tool for it.

drcongo 11y ago
You are the only person who has even mentioned surveys or questionnaires. Arguing with yourself over something only you have mentioned is the very definition of straw man. edit: to clarify - the asking them questions bit mentioned in the article was part of a user testing session. We'd already watched them walk through it trying to complete the tasks required, the follow up questions were for clarification on why they signed up for a non-existent newsletter that we didn't ask them to sign up for. At no point did we do a survey or a questionnaire.
- jasode 11y ago
  >You are the only person who has even mentioned surveys or questionnaires I'm simply using a generalization of something you wrote to ease the flow of the discussion here. You wrote: *"Ask them questions:"* Why is my restatement of that to be a "survey/questionnaire" an unfair generalization? It wasn't a malicious intent to mischaracterize you. If we did a search &replace for "survey/questionnaire" and changed it to acryonym "ATQ" for "Ask Them Questions", does the meaning of my post really change? EDIT to YOUR EDIT: >"At no point did we do a survey or a questionnaire." Sorry, I wasn't contending that you did a literal survey. I was simply a placeholder label for discussion purposes. If we can get past the misunderstanding of labels, I'd think it would be more helpful if you actually address the substance of my previous argument: why does "ATQ" about modal overlays trump "revealed preferences" about the value of web content? >so it seems a little odd to pick that bit as the thing to take issue with. It's not odd because the "Ask Them Questions" was your only visible justification to convince us.
  - drcongo 11y ago
    We're in edit hell now!
- drcongo 11y ago
  Further edit in response to the reply below, which is too deep to reply to – In the interests of brevity, clarity and sticking to the subject, the entire process used to test the modals was not included in the article. I was much more concerned with writing a macro view of the issue than a how-to manual. There's plenty of things worth arguing about in the piece, lots of it is pure opinion, and some of it is probably plain wrong so it seems a little odd to pick that bit as the thing to take issue with. Maybe I should have been much clearer about the testing process.

by jasode 11y ago

drcongo 11y ago

You are the only person who has even mentioned surveys or questionnaires. Arguing with yourself over something only you have mentioned is the very definition of straw man. edit: to clarify - the asking them questions bit mentioned in the article was part of a user testing session. We'd already watched them walk through it trying to complete the tasks required, the follow up questions were for clarification on why they signed up for a non-existent newsletter that we didn't ask them to sign up for. At no point did we do a survey or a questionnaire.

jasode 11y ago
>You are the only person who has even mentioned surveys or questionnaires I'm simply using a generalization of something you wrote to ease the flow of the discussion here. You wrote: *"Ask them questions:"* Why is my restatement of that to be a "survey/questionnaire" an unfair generalization? It wasn't a malicious intent to mischaracterize you. If we did a search &replace for "survey/questionnaire" and changed it to acryonym "ATQ" for "Ask Them Questions", does the meaning of my post really change? EDIT to YOUR EDIT: >"At no point did we do a survey or a questionnaire." Sorry, I wasn't contending that you did a literal survey. I was simply a placeholder label for discussion purposes. If we can get past the misunderstanding of labels, I'd think it would be more helpful if you actually address the substance of my previous argument: why does "ATQ" about modal overlays trump "revealed preferences" about the value of web content? >so it seems a little odd to pick that bit as the thing to take issue with. It's not odd because the "Ask Them Questions" was your only visible justification to convince us.
- drcongo 11y ago
  We're in edit hell now!
drcongo 11y ago
Further edit in response to the reply below, which is too deep to reply to – In the interests of brevity, clarity and sticking to the subject, the entire process used to test the modals was not included in the article. I was much more concerned with writing a macro view of the issue than a how-to manual. There's plenty of things worth arguing about in the piece, lots of it is pure opinion, and some of it is probably plain wrong so it seems a little odd to pick that bit as the thing to take issue with. Maybe I should have been much clearer about the testing process.