Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Crappy website design seems more trustworthy?

news.ycombinator.com

21–24 of 24 posts

Re: Ask HN: Crappy website design seems more trustworthy?

#21
post #9
post #4

I know that in general, the flashier a thing is -- that is, the more obvious effort that has been put into a thing's aesthetics -- the less likely that thing is to be great. My hypothesis is it's because time and money investment was put into aesthetics at the expense of making the product or service better.

Is this true in general? I’ve had the opposite experience. I’d love to see some data if you have any.

I have no objective data, only decades of personal experience and observation. It seems true in the majority of cases to me. Enough of a majority that it's a reasonable rule of thumb. The effect is particularly pronounced with websites.

I've even seen it happen in real time with small YouTubers. They get money and start putting it into "production values", then more often than not the quality of their actual substance declines.

Of course, it's not 100%. There are some flashy things that also happen to be decent, and there are nonflashy things that suck. Flashiness is just a general indicator of what the priorities of the maker are.

Re: Ask HN: Crappy website design seems more trustworthy?

#22
Maybe because it's your bank and you're likely to at least moderately trust the bank you choose? But also, more generally, because it says a lot of things, maybe things you're not conscious of, but it still says them. Off the top of my head:

1) "I manage to survive with this crappy of a design, so I must be doing something else right."

2) "I don't track you all that much. I just get out of the way and let you do stuff."

3) "I don't invest as much time in marketing, I invest time in getting stuff done"

Post reply on HN