Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

kapwing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 666 posts

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#91

Post by GordonS »

dazc wrote: post #14

These chat messenger pop-ups can be quite annoying, the example on the site mentioned is typically 'in your face'. What's particularly frustrating with this one is that there is already a prominent speech bubble icon in the corner of the screen that suggests they have a chat feature - if I want it. It doesn't need to crack open after a second and slap me. I am not defending the obvious misogyny here but I think an ex…

What I really hate is when they popup immediately upon visiting the site - I only just got here, I haven't even had a chance to read your spiel yet!

I do find these real-time chat boxes useful, I just wish they'd stay discreetly in the bottom right corner so they're there when I actually want them :/

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#92

Post by guy98238710 »

tomlock wrote: post #50
tziki wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps because according to studies men are actually more likely to experience online harrasment? http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/07/11/online-harassment-2017...

Your interjection here isn't answering a question I asked. Are you saying that because men are more likely to face harassment, that women are not harassed more when they present as women online?

Your comment doesn't make sense. If the self-reported harassment numbers are correct, it means this case is an exception, not the rule. As for why is it an exception, see other comments about bots, fake photos, and target audience of the site.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#93

Post by guy98238710 »

tomlock wrote: post #28
dazc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people not believe there's actually a problem in society?

There are plenty of people out there who think the legal inequalities faced by women are now completely removed, and everything is therefore ok. Not only is that an incorrect premise, but its an incorrect conclusion - women face significant societal obstacles and pain just because they're women.

So do men (hint: children are more important than money). This case might not be sexism though. It looks like they have a bias in their experiment that skews the results.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#94

Post by teekert »

dazc wrote: post #14

These chat messenger pop-ups can be quite annoying, the example on the site mentioned is typically 'in your face'. What's particularly frustrating with this one is that there is already a prominent speech bubble icon in the corner of the screen that suggests they have a chat feature - if I want it. It doesn't need to crack open after a second and slap me. I am not defending the obvious misogyny here but I think an ex…

The pissing off part was not a variable in this experiment, and it is your personal opinion. If the box is not intrusive I find it nice to be able to talk to a human directly. I does piss me off when I end up chatting to a dumb bot wasting my time though.

In any case, perhaps it makes the conclusion even more shocking: A male can piss someone off with little to no negative effect, a female can't. I fear for the results when taking this experiment into meat space.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#95

Post by _pmf_ »

tomlock wrote: post #2

How many more instances of this happening do we need before people believe there's actually a problem in society surrounding sexism? Honestly I expect to see equivocation more than indictment in the comments section here.

> How many more instances of this happening do we need before people believe there's actually a problem in society surrounding sexism?

I believe there is rampant sexism; what I don't believe is that the approach of treating all men as potential rapists and claiming that masculinity is toxic is working out (in fact, I think it exacerbates the problem; practically all mass shootings are a result of boys/men being systematically imbued with toxic shame).

But yeah, go wear those pussy hats if it makes you feel good.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#96

Post by JustSomeNobody »

I don't know what's worse[0], the fact that Ms. Enthoven has to go through all this simply because she's a woman, or the fact that half the comments on this story are people trying to make excuses[1] for this type of behavior.

Wow!

[0] I do. Obviously what Ms. Enthoven has to go through is worse.

[1] People think it's a bot. People hate chat popups. The photo is fake. Your math is wrong! Etc...

SMH...

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#97

Post by guy98238710 »

teekert wrote: post #94
dazc wrote: post #14

These chat messenger pop-ups can be quite annoying, the example on the site mentioned is typically 'in your face'. What's particularly frustrating with this one is that there is already a prominent speech bubble icon in the corner of the screen that suggests they have a chat feature - if I want it. It doesn't need to crack open after a second and slap me. I am not defending the obvious misogyny here but I think an ex…

The pissing off part was not a variable in this experiment, and it is your personal opinion. If the box is not intrusive I find it nice to be able to talk to a human directly. I does piss me off when I end up chatting to a dumb bot wasting my time though. In any case, perhaps it makes the conclusion even more shocking: A male can piss someone off with little to no negative effect, a female can't. I fear for the resul…

The pissing off part might not be a variable in the experiment, but it still skews the results. You can get any result you want if you pick the right subset of the population and prep them the right way before taking the measurement.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#98

Post by jenthoven »

adventured wrote: post #76
jenthoven wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No - I counted each thread separately. A "burst of messages" counts as 1

edit: and for the downvoters, I operate a service in the retail space that is exclusively for women. Information/data/blog posts of this sort are extremely valuable to me, that's why I'm asking for clarification. Ok, then I'm confused. In the post it shows, for example this: https://i.imgur.com/P4QCWO4.png That says ~14 messages per week. So you're saying the labeling is wrong, that it should say chat sessions per we…

Yes, I'm using the word "messages" loosely in the article. Here, "messages" = message threads or sessions. - We got 2,100 message threads over the last three months. - We got 14 message threads or abusive sessions per week, a small fraction of the 2,100 overall

The average "abusive session" contained only about three or four messages, not 6-7. Otherwise, your math is right.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#99

Post by w0de0 »

vgf wrote: post #64
jenthoven wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey - I totally agree it can be annoying, especially since Drift asks users to enter their email address and people are worried about spam. So it’s a tradeoff between annoyance at the pop up and the support users get when they have problems. Our website is a video editing tool, so we decided that it’s more important to have someone to answer questions than to avoid “peeing off” users. And, regardless of how annoying…

> especially since Drift asks users to enter their email address and people are worried about spam. Huh, okay. (Why bring up some other site?) > Our website is a video editing tool, so we decided .. I don't quite follow - how does that fact justify using this particular dark UI pattern?

> A dark UI pattern.

I disagree. Dark UI is manipulation of the user. For example, hiding 'X' buttons on pop-ups asking for a subscription. (Is refusing to pay for value provided a dark 'pattern' on the part of users?)

This pop-up does not manipulate the user. It is an honest value proposition. So is "Fifty Shades of Grey." I didn't buy it.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#100

Post by logicallee »

This was extremely interesting.

1.

It would be interesting to know to what extent she would have received the same messages if she had had the message (this matches the style of the message they used):

>Hey! Thanks for visiting Kapwing. I'm Julia [or Rachel], founder of Kapwing. If you run into any issues making your video, feel free to let me know, and I'll do my best to help!

By identifying herself as a founder this would separate the message from the chatbots who use female avatars, as mentioned in our comments here in this thread.

2.

I'd also be interested in an even less breezy version (to make it even less like a chatbot), such as:

>Hello and thank you for visiting Kapwing. I'm Julia [or Rachel], founder of Kapwing. If you run into any issues making your video, please do let me know and I'll investigate the issue.

I don't have a guess as to what the results would be: perhaps exactly the same regardless of style and introduction. But it would be interesting to know.

3.

For comparison it would also have also been interesting to use a male model who matches the same description ("I found a stock photo of a blonde woman who was attractive in an obvious way", so a stock photo of a male model who was attractive in an obvious way.)

For this one I do have a guess:

- I expect that in the article/study, 100% of the rude messages came from heterosexual males.

- But there are homosexual males so my guess is that an equally "obviously attractive" man would get 10% as many lewd messages, i.e. from homosexual males. (if use the old figure of "1 in 10" being gay.)

But as far as it goes the study was extremely interesting and worth reporting.

EDIT: I updated men to males above, actually especially since it's a meme site I bet most of the puerile messages were from teenagers - they show striking levels of immaturity.

Post reply on HN