21–30 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are considering an option that blurs out the page instead. Also - we'll add more context to the page.
I think you may have missed my point there.
Our impression (and experience) is that people get more excited about doing something symbolic.
Again, any direct recommendations about how to improve this, and we'll improve it :)
perhaps it should be a button on the website, like "experience the site with FCC's Slow Lane". That way, they can see what the site is like and if they choose to press the button, they can see what it is like to be on the slow lane. Otherwise, the first time visitor may not give the site a chance at all.
We're making a version that's just an anigif that people can embed. That should be live really soon. So, that works for people who don't want to interrupt visitors with a message.
Condescension is not exactly the best way to win people over to your cause.
can you tell us more about why it feels condescending?
While I understand the sentiment, this seems more likely to just encourage site visitors to hit the back button rather than take the desired action.
I disagree. If the site is somewhat heavily trafficked already (which is the kind of site that will actually have an impact), then they'll wait.
http://rubbingalcoholic.com/#ALWAYS_SHOW_SL_WIDGET_COMCAST
If anyone wants to help out with this or give me feedback directly, please email me jeff@rubbingalcoholic.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you may have missed my point there.
If we made a version that stripped out the slowdown effect and just had the action ask, would you run that? Our impression (and experience) is that people get more excited about doing something symbolic. Again, any direct recommendations about how to improve this, and we'll improve it :)
Visibility is the issue, not understanding the problem. I think the message of "the internet could be slower without net neutrality" is the one that needs to be delivered. People generally know what "slower" means.
As I mentioned, a standardized message would probably be more effective, but it's also not something that would be particularly exciting to share on, say, Hacker News.
Why not implement a loading bar that actually progressed slowly and then put a brief explanation underneath the loading bar describing the FCC "slow lane" and how it would negatively impact users?
To add insult to injury, give the user 3 options:
- pay the site owner to access the "fast lane" to your content
- send an email (to FCC chair? maybe a representative?) to voice their anger
- get used to waiting; that'll be the new norm if nobody prevents this, right?
The first option would be incredibly controversial, but would underscore how objectionable the "Slow Lane" idea even is. If anyone is stubborn enough to pay, you could funnel that money into the EFF or some other relevant organization.
The point is that just throwing people a loading screen (especially without a good explanation) will leave the user confused. Once the content loads they'll probably forget about that loading screen anyway (at least on a conscious level), so don't wait until afterward to explain what just happened.
As an aside, there was a comment that users will wait for a website that's sufficiently highly trafficked, but I don't think that's true. I remember some Google presentation[0] where an engineer explained that virtually any extra loading time was enough to discourage users from returning. Maybe that's just with search or other highly interactive sites (rather than reading a blog, for example), but I wouldn't want to test that hypothesis with any site I cared about and managed.
0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il4swGfTOSM - The "impact of slow sites" comes up early on.