New Footer Text About Link Purchases
Feb 28, 2023 6:30:32 GMT -8
bigballofyarn, Linette, and 1 more like this
Post by Kami on Feb 28, 2023 6:30:32 GMT -8
Thoughts:
1. Pop-up information would be preferable. However I glimpsed yesterday that this now triggers a browser popup versus a styled forum modal, which is a bad UX (users do not generally associate "good" content with browser modals as browsers often use this to indicate errors).
2. The average PB user does not know that PB has been bought out by VS. The current messaging (revised from the original called out in the OP) specifies that ad-driven purchases may benefit VS. This is likely to cause additional negative UX due to the lack of disseminated knowledge. I would advise adjusting the wording to clarify why VS is receiving the benefit instead of PB (a simple "[...] VerticalScope, ProBoards' parent company" or something to that effect would suffice).
3. UX is negatively impacted by placing this information in the same line as Privacy etc content. While I understand the reasoning, having this information in a non-removeable line will cause confusion for forums who pay for adfree, especially if adfree payment is driven by the community through donations — no ads should, inherently, mean that the community does not receive messaging relating to ads.
4. Just calling out the "Do Not Sell My Info" link/modal that popped up; why is this not in individual user settings under the privacy tab? This link does not appear for guests, and it feels out of place for a privacy setting to be plastered on every page on the forum. If this is because this is a global account setting, then it should follow the previously established UX of being placed in the forum user profile with additional direction to edit the global user profile.
5. Maybe it's my professional bias, but I really feel that PB would benefit from UXR testing on changes that align it closer to VS's expectations for companies under their umbrella — as previously mentioned, VS's usual users are of a different type than PB's usual users, and objectively I would expect a difference in target demographic reactions to these changes. If VS is content to allow PB to idle without further feature development indefinitely, then I expect it would be in VS's best interest to make sure that PB's users still receive the benefit of PB's historic UX.
1. Pop-up information would be preferable. However I glimpsed yesterday that this now triggers a browser popup versus a styled forum modal, which is a bad UX (users do not generally associate "good" content with browser modals as browsers often use this to indicate errors).
2. The average PB user does not know that PB has been bought out by VS. The current messaging (revised from the original called out in the OP) specifies that ad-driven purchases may benefit VS. This is likely to cause additional negative UX due to the lack of disseminated knowledge. I would advise adjusting the wording to clarify why VS is receiving the benefit instead of PB (a simple "[...] VerticalScope, ProBoards' parent company" or something to that effect would suffice).
3. UX is negatively impacted by placing this information in the same line as Privacy etc content. While I understand the reasoning, having this information in a non-removeable line will cause confusion for forums who pay for adfree, especially if adfree payment is driven by the community through donations — no ads should, inherently, mean that the community does not receive messaging relating to ads.
4. Just calling out the "Do Not Sell My Info" link/modal that popped up; why is this not in individual user settings under the privacy tab? This link does not appear for guests, and it feels out of place for a privacy setting to be plastered on every page on the forum. If this is because this is a global account setting, then it should follow the previously established UX of being placed in the forum user profile with additional direction to edit the global user profile.
5. Maybe it's my professional bias, but I really feel that PB would benefit from UXR testing on changes that align it closer to VS's expectations for companies under their umbrella — as previously mentioned, VS's usual users are of a different type than PB's usual users, and objectively I would expect a difference in target demographic reactions to these changes. If VS is content to allow PB to idle without further feature development indefinitely, then I expect it would be in VS's best interest to make sure that PB's users still receive the benefit of PB's historic UX.