91–100 of 128 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Baseless? You posted all the evidence people need in the form of a screenshot and acknowledgement. People hate the nagging and support the only recourse they have to stop it.
> People One person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that stupid anime girl who is on way too many open source web sites I assume you're referring to https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis . As I understand, this is a tool for blocking bot traffic and is sometimes used as DDOS protection. In my experience it's less obtrusive than Cloudflare, and it's open source and competes with Cloudflare's near monopoly on DDOS protection. I don't think we should be discouraging peop…
[flagged]
Okay, then my little indie-web, zero-commercialization FOSS website is going to go down due to endless residential proxies DDoSing it--either because it crashes or because I can't afford to host it any more. So I lose the ability to share information and you lose the ability to see it.
> Another world is not possible if all you can imagine is repeating the same patterns of corporate oppression that have made the web a wasteland
I'd love for there to be an option that lets people host good, independent websites such that they stay up and are cheap without users occasionally seeing a loading screen or getting captcha'd or whatever. But all the options there are in the "yell at regulators and push for systemic solutions over many years" camp, not the "how can I keep this site from crashing or burning out my bank account right now" camp.
I guess there's also a small minority that like ... host outside of the public HTTPS web or something, but their answer to "how do I make this accessible to nontechnical people" will similarly take years of tooling and education development.
So for now, yeah, I'll "subject users to the harrassment economy" (a 3 second Anubis loading screen) when they want to use my websites. My imagination isn't the limitation on doing anything else; my bank account, server NIC, and the pace of broad social change are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most apps are above a 3.0 because they implement the "nagware" to prompt normal happy users to leave reviews, rather than just relying on people reviewing out of the goodness of their hearts. Unfortunately this makes nagging table stakes to not end up with an abysmally low score.
When I get a nag I leave a 1 star review every time and I know I'm not the only one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People One person.
There are many people in the HN comments supporting the decision to rate apps with one star when said apps solicit ratings. You posted a screenshot of another person agreeing with this perspective, and I'm yet another.
Have you used my software? If not, then your speculation about the design of my review request is indeed baselesss.
I did not question whether some people have a personal one-star policy. Obviously they do. My statement was about my software.
The person in my App Store review screenshot has indeed used my software. That's one person. There is no second or third person here, as far as I can tell. What the App Store reviewer meant by "nag" is not at all what many commenters here are imagining. For example, there is no nag screen, and there is no modal interface that blocks other actions. People are projecting their experience with some other apps onto my app, but my app is not the same as some of those other apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apps can only show you the Apple's dialog for rating three times a year. Many apps first show you their own popup/dialog asking stuff like "Do you like this app?" and only if you click "yes" there then they show you Apple's dialog. And they can show you their own dialog as many times as they like...
Yea, this dark pattern should be disallowed. Apps also do this before they request permissions (like for location and so on). First, they pop up their own dialog to "pre-flight" the request to use location. If the user says NO, they don't even ask using the official API. Only if the user says YES to the custom dialog do they shoot their shot with the official API. Super annoying.
Am I mistaken or is the premise: I don't like that users have an opinion about my app?
I'm sure it's frustrating to put the work into building an app with several features only to receive a one-star review because a user feels slighted by one specific behavior, but this is how users have been trained to behave because it's the only lever of power the users have. Writing a thoughtful and detailed feature request or bug report is often a fool's errand. Users just give the app 1 star and move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I get a nag I leave a 1 star review every time and I know I'm not the only one.
I’m curious—if it was unobtrusive would you feel the same way? For example if it were a game, and after you beat a level or finished a game, if the summary screen showing the stats and points from your session just had, down at the bottom, “Do you love this game? Consider leaving us a review in the App Store!”? I hate the bag popups too, especially when they get in the way of whatever I’m trying to do in the app and…
One problem is that before I have to close your modal dialog I have probably closed 20-30 other modal dialogs that I never wanted to have open just in the first few hours of the day. I have been using the web all day and people are always trying to steal a little bit of my attention with everybody trick in the book and the one thing that comes across as "luxury" to me is that when you don't do that in any way shape or form.
To be fair, a lot of the problem is applications jumping on you the moment you start them up. It might be that if you work for a company in Silicon Valley you think it just normal to get jumped on by five homeless people in a row as soon as you poke up your head. But sorry, it's not!
Specifically I have this problem with the Creative Cloud Applications that I only used when I am under distress. Like I use Adobe Illustrator for an unpleasant task that I have to do every three months (and have a checklist for now!) or I use Acrobat Pro because I am handling paperwork I am behind on. I want to fight off the demons in my head and get the job done, I do not want to evaluate anything about new features that have been added to the applications. If it had some sense that I'd completed a task and then had a good feeling about the app then yeah, maybe I'd like to hear about a new feature, or maybe put in a good word for your app.
Yeah, like every public rating system. Google reviews on restaurants wouldn’t directly go into a Michelin guide either, and the same is true for Amazon ratings. Welcome to the real world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, this dark pattern should be disallowed. Apps also do this before they request permissions (like for location and so on). First, they pop up their own dialog to "pre-flight" the request to use location. If the user says NO, they don't even ask using the official API. Only if the user says YES to the custom dialog do they shoot their shot with the official API. Super annoying.
Apps informing the user they are doing to ask for permission is not a dark pattern. It’s used to give user more context. Maybe you’ve seen it done poorly but when done correctly it’s good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The one star nag review is accurate to me. As a potential user, I know not to buy the app. I despise ads and nag screens are in the same boat. Just because you don't like the value system of your users doesn't mean you get to call them false or fake. Good product managers LISTEN to their users. You clearly are not willing to do that, despite the now overwhelming validation of your users complaints you are receiving.
> The one star nag review is accurate to me. As a potential user, I know not to buy the app. I despise ads and nag screens are in the same boat. How do you know it's accurate, when you haven't used my app? That's actually not accurate. I don't have a nag screen.
But your paid for app does request a rating when using it? That’s what people call a nag screen