Too Many Topics About US Election May Alienate Some Users

@jespah,

The amount of coding to change "Australia" to "Oceania" can't possibly compare to the coding involved with setting up an entirely new interface etc.

I think that an aesthetic reworking of the site could have been good as long as it remained within conventional standards.

example: http://www.tekkenzaibatsu.com/forums/index.php

This is an old forum I used to go to years ago. It didn't always look this way. Many changes have happened and new features have came since, but even without having ever been there, I bet you could quickly navigate that site. The inverse I'm afraid is not true.

I can now navigate this site but it came from exploring around and patience. That patience was only there because I had a community connection to the members.

I had a friend who used to post on the S&R forums here. He quit when the change came and instead posts on a local forum from my school.

Here: http://seek42.net/phpBB3/

There is a reason that these sites are organized the same, and it's not from a lack of creativity.

I think that A2K needs to have a directory style forum. Perhaps we can keep the tags too. I'm not sure how those are exclusive.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

I mean, for sure, no prob - its true that some threads wont get tagged the right way. There's more room for user error in the new system. And the newer the thread and the fewer people are tagging, the more likely it is to not be found in the obvious place. And you didnt have that problem on the old site, or if things were misplaces moderators would move them. There are real trade-offs involved - the greater flexibility in tagging vs a less waterproof system covering every thread; the "mothering" of threads on the old site in terms of them being moved into the right place by moderators vs the unsustainable burden on the small moderating team, etc.

But what I am wondering is whether there's not a lot of focusing going on about what the consequences could all hypothetically be, when if you go and check how it works in practice, it seems to actually work pretty well by and large. Maybe not 100% foolproof, but those two lists above of the newest 10 threads tagged politics or philosophy sure dont seem to confirm that there's widespread blurring and misplacing of categories going on?

I dunno. Have you clicked into the Humour tag? Some of that isn't even funny.

Wink

1 Reply

@Mame,

(it's cuz you are spelling it wrong...)

Humor is funny.

Laughing

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

A "hot dog"?? A HOT DOG is the best we can do? tsk tsk tsk

1 Reply

@Mame,

Mame wrote:

A "hot dog"?? A HOT DOG is the best we can do? tsk tsk tsk

'S'all right.

I done been to the US (and Quebec and Montreal)...and I know you got some great food.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

Many of the changes to A2K were to things that weren't broken and were extremely intuitive and consistent with other forums. While the changes made A2k unique (I have seen no other forum with this format) it doesn't make it inherently better.

The old forum wasn't intuitive, but yes you were used to it. This software has some pretty glaring deficiencies in navigation and those are the next things we are addressing.

For example, you can use tags much like you could use forums but here we are lacking a good display for tags and that will change, the home page is going too be reworked to have a better tag grid front and center.

The use of sorting is going to change as well, and we are breaking out the grids into separate links in sitewide navigation. So we'll have New Topics, New Posts etc instead of having the same grid sorting capabilities.

But I don't want to debate web interface design with armchair quarterbacks. It's a little frustrating because they are dealing with gut and impressions and I do this day in and day out professionally.

It's hard to argue with "it just sucks". I know that there's a lot that sucks but these proclamations are flippant observations and impressions and they are tightly held ones so I just have to agree to disagree.

Quote:

Here: http://able2know.org/tag/spirituality_and_religion/
That's just sad. Forget the site veterans for a moment and remember that this was once one of the most thriving areas on A2k for new posters.

That's a reflection of our poorly grouped forums in the past and forums that had unwieldy names are going to turn into more dormant tags while other tags replace them.

A better example is "Science and math". Now most of the activity has moved to more specific tags like "science". It's going to take some time for the tags to sort themselves up to the top naturally but the real reason this is happening is because the previous groupings didn't make sense.

Quote:

Here: http://able2know.org/tag/relationships/
While there are a lot of topics, look at the number of replies. The new site lacks functionality and appeal to new users.

For new users the big lacking feature is email updates. New users who don't have the habit of visiting every day may not remember to come back and the email updates are the next highest priority (after some basic navigation overhaul).

Now there is a specific deficiency in tags that you are touching on, but there's plans to address that as well. Without the ability to create your own tags the topics were more broadly grouped. So for example if there was once just a "technology" forum it's now likely to be spread out into more specific tags.

That's a legitimate difference in the ability to see that kind of grouping but there are going to be tools that address this as well. Once more data is collected we can do algorithmic groupings and recommendations.

Things like showing related threads automatically, better related tag groupings, semantic recommendation engines, and most of all the user ability to filter and group tags into a grid are going to do a lot more for this than the previous forums did.

So for example, if you could have a grid that automatically showed you topics you are interested in (based off your voting history or other use history) and could filter and add specific tags then you can get this kind of overall view with more control than the current need to browse more tags.

Now in practice this isn't making a huge difference yet anyway but this is a legitimate complaint. Tags are spread out more than forums.

But I think the things we have planned to do with them will more than make up for it, and the more broad groupings aren't something that can scale with the community well while this can.

If the site were much larger, the old forums would have deficiencies of their own in relation to the information architecture not scaling with the site's growth.

Quote:

I've heard no explanation as to why we reinvented the wheel here...

I've explained quite a bit, but at some point it's just a waste of time. Some users just want to believe that they are right and everything is ruined and no facts or reason is going to sway them. Their opinion is based on impressions that are not always accurate but are still strongly held. We just have to agree to disagree and they can spend all their time on this site telling us all how much it sucks if that's their cup of tea.

The traffic is up (both pages and unique users), there is more activity and I just don't want to endlessly argue with people who are determined to believe that all is lost. They are entitled to their opinion and their impressions and metrics and data don't jive well with strongly held opinions and expressions.

I understand the dynamics of the community very well and know where it's better worse or needs to improve but most users simply take their impression and make claims about the site and what's happening to it that just aren't true and I just don't think that it's arguing with them is worthwhile and they aren't going to change my mind by me trying to do so.

I'd rather spend the time working on the things I know I need to do. I need to approach usability and interface design as a science, with the use of data and analytics and for me "intuitive" is measurable, not just an impression.

For people like Hawkeye it's just an axe to grind at this point and I just don't have time for that. He wouldn't give up his chicken little routine for the world, and who am I to take it away from him with the facts?

I tried that before, but he just ignores them and preaches on about the falling sky. So I'll go back to real work and not sink time into people who are determined to be prophets of doom. I'm never going to please everyone and can't get emotionally invested in trying to do so. There is always going to be more angst than I have the time to personally respond to.

I'll do my level best to address objective things we can do better, but I'm not going to fight with users over their subjective differences of opinion. They are entitled to say it's stupid and wrong and I'll just have to live with failing to convince them otherwise.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

I think that A2K needs to have a directory style forum. Perhaps we can keep the tags too. I'm not sure how those are exclusive.

This I agree with, and it's always been in the works. We couldn't do it that well without the data being collected (e.g. we are going to use "related tag" algorithms to simulate nesting) but this is the big change that's coming.

We are going to release our version of the forum index built off of tags soon.

Edit: and incidentally from the feedback I've received what puts off new users are any topics about the site or its members, new users universally don't give a hoot about either and 9 out of 10 times I get negative feedback it's about this. Every few weeks the home page (on default sort) is just about the core group, the birthdays the troll hating, the site hating and the arguments.

The negative response I get from new users is about the "cliques" and self-absorbed nature of the site. They don't tend to have the same angst others claim they do, and when they complain it's usually about very objective things.

In short, they usually get around better than the regulars and make a heck of a lot more sense.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

(it's cuz you are spelling it wrong...)

Humor is funny.

Who should I vote for for Prime Minister?

Now THAT's Funny Smile

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

Here: http://able2know.org/tag/spirituality_and_religion/
That's just sad. Forget the site veterans for a moment and remember that this was once one of the most thriving areas on A2k for new posters.

Try this one: http://able2know.org/tag/religion/

(I mean, come on..)

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert wrote:

Edit: and incidentally from the feedback I've received what puts off new users are any topics about the site or its members, new users universally don't give a hoot about either and 9 out of 10 times I get negative feedback it's about this.

Yep, I have mentioned this before re: Abuzz. When I first showed up there, it had just undergone a major change and everyone was complaining about it. I had a good friend there (like my best friend IRL -- she hasn't been around in ages though, nobody you guys know) and stuck it out, based in part on her assurances. But I very nearly left for that reason.

NOT, mind you, the changes themselves -- things looked fine to me. But because so much of what was actually going on was people kvetching about the changes, getting mad at each other because some defended the changes and some hated them, etc. Profoundly uninteresting -- and offputting -- to me as a newbie.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I must admit to a fantasy of doing Sarah PAlin on the floor of the Princeton Engineering Library. Technically, that really isnt politics .

Sure it's politics. That would give her tremendous foreign experience since I highly doubt she's ever been in a library.

0 Replies

Robert Gental - Good news on the work to add a directory addition. I continue to assert thought that the old site was far more intuitive. It isn't just some feeling either, the "data" to support said claim is simply that the old site followed a standard convention that cross compatible with other sites. If you knew how to work one forum, you knew how to work 99% of them. The new changes IMO took us out of the 99% and put us in the 1% that you had to figure out how to use.

I can appreciate the work put in, I don't think the sky is falling, I don' think the site is doomed. However, comments in regards to real problems of the site should not be used to characterize others as armchair quarterbacks. For those without such administrative privilege, this is the only way for them to have a seat at the table. For those at the head of the table, addressing these concerns comes with the territory.

I'm sure it gets old dealing with "it sucks," but from this end, it gets old hearing "there's something wrong with you, it doesn't suck." I think that most users voicing complaints have given far more constructive criticism than simply "it sucks," and I know I understand you have limits as to what you can do, just don't forget the user. Unique hits, is a positive measure in business terms, but it doesn't mean much in terms of the functionality of the site and it's content contributors.

I don't get anything out of a unique visitor. I get something however from a visitor that comes, sets up an account, and starts to post.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

However, comments in regards to real problems of the site should not be used to characterize others as armchair quarterbacks.

Why? You don't know what you are talking about and use jargon about usability that you base on nothing more than your impressions. That is the quintessential armchair quarterback.

People who don't have the foggiest notion about what constitutes usability tossing around terms they don't begin to understand to make assertions that are mostly just wildly off base.

Quote:

For those without such administrative privilege, this is the only way for them to have a seat at the table. For those at the head of the table, addressing these concerns comes with the territory.

Sure, you can spend all your time here complaining, leaving, leaving again, and threatening to leave the next day over whatever your bone to pick with the site is, and sometimes the appropriate way to address this is to agree to disagree and move on.

Quote:

I'm sure it gets old dealing with "it sucks," but from this end, it gets old hearing "there's something wrong with you, it doesn't suck."

That's just not true. When there is legitimate concerns and criticism raised I acknowledge it. When it's nothing more than subjective impressions that you'd like to assert as fact then I can do nothing more than agree to disagree and not waste my time.

I correct the information (e.g. about declining use) for others, you are going to preach it regardless of facts so I'll occasionally set the record straight when I have the time.

Quote:

I think that most users voicing complaints have given far more constructive criticism than simply "it sucks," and I know I understand you have limits as to what you can do, just don't forget the user.

I am about as user-centric of a web architect as you'll ever find, there are a lot of things we haven't yet had the time and resources to do but that is not due to forgetting the user.

Some users think the whole world revolves around them, and that their impressions are what's happening to everyone. So when you just plain make up stuff about where the site is declining and start preaching it there's not much more I can do than tell you that the data just doesn't support your assertions but that you are entitled to your opinion.

You make claims like how newbies are put off, and how they aren't around anymore and that's just plain not true. You assert that "we all" feel this way and that and that's just not true.

I am focused on the users, and I watch how the collective group interacts with the site closely. You seem to think that everyone feels the way you do and have the habit of demanding to be addressed when you don the mantle of speaking for all.

Quote:

Unique hits, is a positive measure in business terms, but it doesn't mean much in terms of the functionality of the site and it's content contributors.

It's a measure of the site to be able to draw new members and is something Hawkeye made up information about (by trying to use Alexa to measure our traffic while I skip the guesswork and have direct logs to work with) while trying to make the same accusation that you are implying that our business motivations are overriding the users desires.

That's just not true, revenue is down because we are focusing on getting users interacting with the site for long term revenue and our ability to gain more members is the sole solution to revenue.

In addition, this is not our main revenue focus for our company. We create other sites in profitable verticals that we'll have to make the money on, this kind of site isn't very profitable.

I can make 35 times the revenue on a more specific niche site with the same traffic, and we built the company to provide a viable future for able2know, and able2know is supported by the other work we do.

Able2know is our labor of love, that we want revenue for in order to keep it going. It's not our cash cow that we are milking at the detriment of users like the soap box crowd likes to imply.

Quote:

I don't get anything out of a unique visitor. I get something however from a visitor that comes, sets up an account, and starts to post.

And you make up things about the rate at which they are doing so and preach them as if your impression were reality.

This is a good example, you've claimed the new users are suffering higher attrition rates than on the previous software. What is your evidence for that?

You know full well that you have none, and you are just preaching your impression as fact. The software is much more friendly to new users than ever before, they can start topics without logging in and are then prompted to do so with drafts, pulling more of them from visitor to member than before.

There is attrition due to things like lacking email updates, but your claims about intuitiveness and all are simply your impressions that are not borne out by real hard data.

Listening to users is very important, but armchair quarterbacks on a soapbox are a different case. Your assertions and impressions are tightly held and you won't let go of them. This is the ideologue in web development that just isn't worth spending all the time arguing with.

When people have had specific qualms based on objective differences I've done my best to address them, and so far hundreds of their instances of feedback were quickly turned into improvements.

The others who just want to get on a soap box and preach doom and gloom aren't giving objective feedback that is useful and it's a waste of time to spend time arguing with when there are objective users that can be engaged in more edifying feedback loops.

So I get it, you think it sucks. You don't tend to have good observations about why (just being like the 90's forums layout isn't useful, the changes being made are because this site is not going to just be a forum anymore and that model isn't going to fit) but you are entitled to your opinion.

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

PS: I still think the site sucks, I'm not yet ready to push for new members (i.e. market the site) till we address a lot of problems I see in the interface and design.

But to make things better, I need to work with objective reality and not subjective impressions. There are plenty of people giving objective feedback that's very useful to us in improving the site. The soap box crowd is louder but doesn't tend to provide useful feedback.

0 Replies

Too many inane topics might alienate some users (read those nimh posted) and also I agree, I miss those little side sub category title buttons you could easily see and click if you wanted to get out of politics, which always has centered around US politics though. Sometimes I think people should remember that old saying about "if it ain't broke"...but maybe it was and we just didn't know it.

Pretty pictures a few pages back, like the lighting in the last one.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gental wrote:

Deist TKO wrote:
Unique hits, is a positive measure in business terms, but it doesn't mean much in terms of the functionality of the site and it's content contributors.
It's a measure of the site to be able to draw new members...

You can lead a horse to water...

Listen, I'm not saying that you or anyone else is being overly pragmatic and capitalistic in the direction of the site. I only mean to say that the product a forum offers is user created after all the bells and whistles.

Robert Gental wrote:

Deist TKO wrote:
I don't get anything out of a unique visitor. I get something however from a visitor that comes, sets up an account, and starts to post.
And you make up things about the rate at which they are doing so and preach them as if your impression were reality.

This is a good example, you've claimed the new users are suffering higher attrition rates than on the previous software. What is your evidence for that?

I made things up about what I benefit from?
My impression about what I get a benefit from is not mine to share ("preach" as you labeled it)?
What evidence do I have that it is what I benefit from?

My statement is about me, not a new user here, and it is independent of any site. I speak for myself here, and nobody else.

I can agree to disagree, but stop being so defensive. If you want objective words, put on your objective ears/eyes. I'm not saying the site is doomed. I'm not saying I hate the new site. I'm not saying it sucks. I'm saying it was not a improvement, and I'd prefer you to address my words, and not what you extrapolate. Put fewer words in my mouth and more marbles in yours if that's what it takes.

Changes were made at a large investment by you and others, I can understand why you'd want to defend your choices, but this...

Robert Gental wrote:

Why? You don't know what you are talking about and use jargon about usability that you base on nothing more than your impressions. That is the quintessential armchair quarterback.

...is really uncalled for.

You think I learned how to use a forum here? Think this is my first forum? Only forum? Think I haven't been doing my best to use the new site?

I've used dozens of forums. I still use a couple of others. I've tried my best to act on the suggestions here. I have started threads on other topics to try and fix the problem I felt was here.

My statements RE: usability/intuitive design come from experience on sites just like this one. You claim I "know nothing" and I think you're losing your cool. I am not claiming to know it all, but don't say that what I know is nothing and then pat yourself on the back and call yourself "user-centric."

I don't expect you to take my advise. Partly because I know that no person can please every person or fill every request. However, I also gather from your "jargon" that I should be conditioned to simply be complacent and not bother voicing my ideas/concerns to someone who will simply be dismiss me quickly or tell me that I don't know anything.

Be fair, be objective. I do appreciate the work you are doing, I'd like more than anything to see this site grow and flourish. It is for those reasons, I'm speaking up. I don't deserve your contempt.

e.g. - When you were forward and honest about the issues with IP banning and your software, I was understanding. I just needed to know that something was being done, since I felt unsupported by the Moderators. I am nothing but compassionate for the obstacles involved in an undertaking like this. I've already thanked you for addressing the issue of the directories, but you decided to unload your frustration on me about the criticisms you are receiving.

Robert Gental wrote:

...the appropriate way to address this is to agree to disagree and move on.

Here, I agree to disagree about the functional changes made to the site. You've addressed that future changes are on the horizon. I'll share my thoughts on those in the future once I've tried them, exactly as I'm entitled to do so. Fair. Simple. Done.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@revel,

revel wrote:

Too many inane topics might alienate some users (read those nimh posted) and also I agree, I miss those little side sub category title buttons you could easily see and click if you wanted to get out of politics, which always has centered around US politics though. Sometimes I think people should remember that old saying about "if it ain't broke"...but maybe it was and we just didn't know it.

Pretty pictures a few pages back, like the lighting in the last one.

You can click other tags to get out of Politics, or just go to Home (click the Able2know icon) and then click on whatever tags you like from there (left-hand side).

And you're right, it was broke, and it was breaking, and a lot of folks didn't know it. We're doing what we can to fix it. Thanks for your patience -- now, where's the lightning photo? It sounds cool. Smile

0 Replies

Quote:

4. Bring users in during community decisions

If the Digg HD-DVD encryption key fiasco taught us anything, it's that you can't make rash top-down decisions and expect your community to be okay with it. For MetaFilter, I run an entire forum devoted to discussing the site itself. I float new ideas and new UI enhancements there and anyone else can start a thread about some aspect of the site. When I have to make a tough decision, I mention it in a new thread and get the members' reactions and often tailor the final result based on their feedback. Like the Satisfaction blog described, if Kevin Rose posted something saying "hey we're kind of between a rock and hard place " we've been threatened with legal action over a post and would like to remove it to comply with the request" there'd still be a bit of an outcry (and that's why stuff like Chilling Effects exists), but it would have been nowhere near the reaction they got.

Welcoming the opinions of users gives the community owner(s) valuable feedback and gives members another way to contribute positively to the community.

http://fortuito.us/2007/05/some_community_tips_for_2007

I, TKO and others are attempting to contribute to the success of a2k, and are shut out by creators who can't see beyond their egos

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

I, TKO and others are attempting to contribute to the success of a2k, and are shut out by creators who can't see beyond their egos

That's a hoot. The single best thing you could do to contribute to the success of A2K would be to disappear. Your very presence is a net loss in traffic.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

I made things up about what I benefit from?
My impression about what I get a benefit from is not mine to share ("preach" as you labeled it)?
What evidence do I have that it is what I benefit from?

No, you (and more so Hawkeye) made up things about how new users interact, and I wanted to set that record straight. You espouse a lot of concern about new users, but they typically don't have the concerns you claim they do.

Quote:

My statement is about me, not a new user here, and it is independent of any site. I speak for myself here, and nobody else.

That's fine, but when you start claiming that the new users are put off by the software then you start to speak for others.

Quote:

I can agree to disagree, but stop being so defensive.

I'm not being defensive Diest, I can live with you thinking what you want but I do want to correct misinformation for others who may read it and reserve the right to express my annoyance with it.

Ironically, it appears that criticizing your criticism is something that annoys you.

Quote:

I'm saying it was not a improvement, and I'd prefer you to address my words, and not what you extrapolate. Put fewer words in my mouth and more marbles in yours if that's what it takes.

<shrugs> I don't intend to try to argue with you or convince you. That's an exercise in futility. I just intent to set the record straight when you overstate your opinions and to express my frustration when you are being annoying.

Quote:

You think I learned how to use a forum here? Think this is my first forum? Only forum? Think I haven't been doing my best to use the new site?

I never claimed otherwise, I said that you don't understand interface design and usability even if you'd like to give advice on it.

This doesn't mean you don't know how to use forums, it just means that when you speak about intuitive interfaces you merely mean what you are familiar with and not what is truly intuitive.

Truly intuitive design should be so for people without familiarity with the interface as well, and there are often conflicting needs in that regard.

Typical forum software isn't very intuitive and usable, but it's familiar (to you and the others who have used it).

Quote:

My statements RE: usability/intuitive design come from experience on sites just like this one. You claim I "know nothing" and I think you're losing your cool. I am not claiming to know it all, but don't say that what I know is nothing and then pat yourself on the back and call yourself "user-centric."

User-centric design has nothing to do with whether or not a user understands usability. User-centric design is achieved by observing the users needs and feedback and acting objectively on them.

What I am saying is that when you start preaching about what is intuitive based on your own impressions it often doesn't have a relation with what is actually intuitive for the new members you like to try to speak for.

I listen to lots of feedback, and act on it accordingly but that doesn't mean there is no room to express frustration with armchair quarterback who are being annoying.

Quote:

I don't expect you to take my advise. Partly because I know that no person can please every person or fill every request. However, I also gather from your "jargon" that I should be conditioned to simply be complacent and not bother voicing my ideas/concerns to someone who will simply be dismiss me quickly or tell me that I don't know anything.

No, do what you like. But when you start getting annoying I'll say so. If you want to spend your time complaining and criticizing have at it. I am not trying to stop you, I am criticizing you for it because I find it annoying.

Quote:

Be fair, be objective.

I am. For example the areas of tagging where you have objective and legitimate complaints are things we are working on.

When you are just overstating your opinion and speaking for the newbie experience that you don't understand I will say so.

Quote:

It is for those reasons, I'm speaking up. I don't deserve your contempt.

I don't have contempt for you, I have frustration with you and see your efforts as being counter-productive. If you are going to spend so much time criticizing you should be able to take some criticism yourself.

Quote:

I've already thanked you for addressing the issue of the directories, but you decided to unload your frustration on me about the criticisms you are receiving.

I'm not frustrated with the criticism. Good criticism is a great source to find ideas for improvement.

What is frustrating is when the criticism is repeated ad nauseum and demands to address it are made that get in the way of the actual work that needs to get done and makes the site more self-referential and less useful as a result.

Foxfyre has the same criticisms that you do in tags, for example, but hasn't frustrated me once on the issue because she's a lot less demanding and obnoxious about it. She's had her say but doesn't feel the need to try represent the whole of the community and demand answers like you have a penchant to do.

Do you see a difference? Anything is annoying if it's repeated ad nauseum.

Quote:

Here, I agree to disagree about the functional changes made to the site. You've addressed that future changes are on the horizon. I'll share my thoughts on those in the future once I've tried them, exactly as I'm entitled to do so. Fair. Simple. Done.

And I'll share my opinion as well, Diest. My opinion is that the loudest mouths criticizing the site often have the least objective things to say and are frustrating.

When they start demanding answers it's a demand on my time that hampers my ability to get things done, and when they start speaking for others and making claims about our intent it is frustrating.

Hawkeye is who I was mainly talking about, he's not trying to better the community he has a grudge and is trying to blame the software for his unpopularity.

He started making claims about our traffic that I wanted to set straight. And when you make claims about intuitiveness for all I want to set that straight as well.

If you were merely saying that you don't like something that's fine. And when you started (with your leaving thread) it didn't bother me. But people who then decide to stay and complain incessantly do get frustrating to me. People who do nothing but talk about how great the site is would be just as frustrating if it were as prevalent, but thankfully happy folk tend to obsess less about what is right than unhappy folk with what is wrong.

I don't have contempt for it (hell it's important for me not to be emotionally invested in happy or unhappy users or I'd not have much fun), but I think you can understand why it'd be annoying at certain volumes.

It's the ad nauseum part that gets annoying, not the criticism.

Think of it like this "Too Many Topics About ____ May Alienate Some Users".

1 Reply

Too Many Topics About US Election May Alienate Some Users

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know