Alright. Stop. I will tell you exactly why people do this, even though it is obviously against the user experience. There is value in data. There is value in having users. There is value in having email addresses. There is value in having first names, last names, interests, genders, whatever the sign up form chooses to collect. First, if the startup isn't selling a product or service, then they are selling their users. Whether that is literally selling the list of names/emails/etc or the traditional ad platform or some new unique way, that is dependent on the company itself. When startups go to get VC or attention or whatever the next step to obtain whatever their next goal is, they use that data and those users as leverage. "Look we have users!" It doesn't really matter if a bunch of the users aren't active or even real if the entire goal is to have a large number on the page. Secondly, now it is possible to contact those users. It could be a daily update, a weekly update, an email in the future asking them to come back, anything. There is an entirely different but related debate about the sneaky things people do to make sure that those people who sign up click "send me emails!" You can read the whole thing here. He notes the use of autochecking, double negatives, hiding checkboxes, and a whole slew of other things. So people chose to implement bad UI and force users to sign up to be able to directly sell users, indirectly sell users, or directly contact users. Does it make it right? No. But when the other option is not having it AND you are competing in a market where everyone else does it, it is pretty hard to justify the decision to not have sign ups. The subset of users who notice, care and commend sites for taking those steps is less valuable than the alternative.We know this. So why do we keep forcing users to do it?
Have you ever heard of a trammel net? t’s a type of fishing net that is made up of two layers of different types of net. The fish – or your user – can either get caught up by the first layer, or the second layer, or they can get stuck between the two. They’re banned in most kinds of commercial fishing, but it seems you can put them in your UIs without any legal repercussions
I think I by and large agree with you insom. I actually think a good solution to the constant request to sign up is to integrate with Twitter/Facebook. I actually think it would be a good idea if hubski gave new users an opportunity to link to their Twitter accounts. Deeper integration with Twitter is always a good thing (IMHO) and it may make new visitors more inclined to sign up because it is easier than entering in all of your personal data for the millionth time.
I'll bring it up with the team. After talking with Zygar for a good 3 hours last night, I want to really start listening and ask users what they think/want/like/dislike/find valuable in hubski. He pointed out that assumptions and gut instincts may lead us down a narrow path. As much as I would love to spend the rest of my internet life with people who think, like, and feel the same way as me, a variety of personalities is much more interesting. :P That said, personally I create new accounts on sites to keep things from being linked too heavily because of past experiences and horror stories and doxxing. I've noticed an increase in Twitter/Facebook sign up options on sites so perhaps it may be valuable or convenient for others. Hubski doesn't ask for a ton of information either - just username and password and email, but I guess having the option to have it auto-pulled from Twitter is more convenient. If implemented, it would need to be an option along with the traditional log in because I don't think a lot of our users (especially redditors) would be appreciative of this. If anyone else wants to throw their two cents in on this, I'll take note.
I'm sure this will come up on Saturday, but I personally feel like Hubski needs to start becoming "more social". I want Hubski to grow and I want to see Hubski "share" and "comment" buttons on more sites. I want to see the Hubski logo become a standard next to fb, twitter, pinterest, linkedin, stumbleupon, reddit, etc. I think Twitter is a good social media outlet to start reaching out and start promoting Hubski content more. That's just me though.
I took over the @hubskier account so I'm trying to be more active and engaging there. And I started tweeting again from my personal account that had been inactive since college. Maybe you can give me some pointers. Growth for Hubski is going to be a process but with the help of people like you who fully believe in Hubski, I have no doubt we will get there. The main issue I see is that the people who "get it" really love it and fully believe in it, but that isn't a majority of the internet right now. We need to find a way to talk with the people who don't get Hubski and see if there is anything we can change to be more accommodating, without changing the core of what Hubski is. So far the people who I have talked to (the boyfriend, my brother, my mom, a couple coworkers) just aren't looking for a community like this. Some prefer reddit because it is more active and has easily digestible content for quick laughs. Some, like my boyfriend and mom, simply prefer surfing facebook, catching up with old friends, or watching videos on youtube over discussing things online. Some, like my dad, are just impossibly bad with computers. He does enjoy the newsletter a lot though. I look forward to talking with you and the team on Saturday because I think you have really great insight into the larger social media realm and that can be really helpful to continue and hasten our growth. At the same time, we want to make sure we aren't growing simply to grow. We want to make sure the community and experience and the suburb discussions aren't lost.
I agree in part with both you and theadvancedapes here. It's great to have growth on the site and more people, but this is something of a sacred site (at least for me, again variety of perspective.) What's really fantastic about Hubski is that the core is so defined as to what we want to see and so easily verbalized: A thoughtful web. This should be a challenging site to come to. It should force browsing and reading habits to be broken and it should be understood that it's not a site for everyone, some just don't want it, and moreover, those of us who do want it can even understand that it shouldn't be the single place to be. I revel in the conceptualization of Hubski as a "third place", where you can truly feel you know the users that are around the site; where you can have complex relationships with different users; where you can discuss your ideas on a variety of issues, and have those discussions connect in your mind to other discussions with the same people; and truly make everything about the site a web of connections. There was an article linked yesterday titled As We May Yet Think that had a proposal from 1947 about something called a memex that would do what the web does, but create personal references and connections for the user. Hubski approaches that by keeping the site centered on discussion and maintaining what it is without allowing it to become too convoluted and saturated by linking it to everything else. It's a separate place for us to be.
It's nice to read this. My vision for Hubski has always been to create a space that didn't exist. I am not convinced that the web that we have is the web that we all want. In addition, I've always thought that some of the most important differences were going to be subtle. By the very nature of a site like Hubski, what is best about it cannot jump out at you. It is not immediately apparent, and to make it immediately apparent would require changing the nature of the site. I know that users (myself included) would love for the site to grow more quickly. However, growth will remain a secondary goal. The first goal of Hubski is to provide a specific type of experience. No other goal can change that. That's not to say that there isn't more than one possible experience to be had on Hubski, but I know the one that I want to support above all others. I am not much interested in allowing users to sign up with Twitter or Facebook credentials. Facebook is a publicly-held company with goals that are vastly different than ours. Twitter remains more of an open-ended platform, but even then, I don't want to entangle our purpose and vision with theirs. It seems that Twitter is looking towards an IPO in the coming year. The internet presents a lot of possibilities. Since the days that I BBSed locally on a 1200 baud modem, I have seen a number of possibilities explored. These experiences have convinced me that one should know one's business. That's where the magic happens. When something feels right for Hubski, it's pretty obvious. When it's not obvious, we have to understand exactly why we are doing it.
I agree with you Meriadoc. I didn't always, but mk has been pretty adamant about us not "linking to other sites" in a way that intertwined the experience. For example, I'm pretty sure that there is no way we would ever have people log in with their FB accounts. Why? Because we aren't FB, we're Hubski. We don't want to be FB or any one else. You are also right that there should be a barrier to entry to use Hubski. It should require someone to have to put forth some effort to use. That is one thing we talk about often. There is a natural tug and pull on the team about making it easier to sign up and use and maintaining a learning curve that sort of "weeds out" those that don't have the "time" to dedicate to a site like this. Nothing worthwhile in life is easy, I'm not sure becoming part of a community should be either. That said, I think it's very important to ensure that the people that are excited to check out hubski and see what it's all about don't feel discouraged because content discovery or introductions to new users isn't intuitive. -It should be, but I think we'd lose more than we'd gain by having FB or Twitter logins. So, I think you'll find that we appreciate where you're coming from... a lot. That said, the challenge becomes, how can we attract interesting people willing to invest that kind of time? It's a slow process, but the best way is by referral. Tell people you know, that you think would like it here. It's that simple imo. That's how real growth happens. Hell... send them the Hubski Newsletter that insomniasexx has been sending out. -It's a great way to test the waters. Thanks for the comment Meriadoc.
I agree with you (especially about not just growing for growth's sake) and have noticed that you're reaching out with Twitter more. I'm excited to discuss it in greater depth in person!