![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reddragdiva) wrote in ![[site community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/comm_staff.png){kind=small}
dw_suggestions2010-03-13 06:26 pm
Site-specific reply option for sites you auto-crosspost to
Title:
Site-specific reply option for sites you auto-crosspost to
Area:
comments
Summary:
As well as "anon", "OpenID" and "DW user", add a comment option specific to any site you automatically crosspost to, as commenters will be coming from there.
Description:
I posted the full rant on my DW: http://reddragdiva.dreamwidth.org/30773.html Update: More detailed user experience reports from frustrated LJ posters on that post.
I have recently set my DW to crosspost to LiveJournal and direct all comments back here. However, it seems that in practice, DreamWidth's OpenID login for LiveJournal users is crappy, annoying and frequently just doesn't work for non-technical users. I'm seeking more info for a proper bug report. But basically, the OpenID comment option has confused non-geeks to the point where they can't work it after ages trying.
The thing about the LiveJournal engine is it's ridiculously easy to use. People who can't work computers can participate with huge success, and geeks don't get annoyed. A successful interface has to work for geeks and anti-geeks.
The OpenID requirement as presently implemented is a Linux c.1998 style solution: tell the user to hand-dig a latrine, then hand them a toilet seat to prop on top, and honestly think you've done something for user-friendliness.
The obvious provider-neutral solution: if someone is automatically crossposting to another site, people will be coming from there — so include said sites as express options for commenting. A box something like "LiveJourna(tm) user: [_______] LiveJournal will confirm your identity." Accept a username, a username with hyphens, a URL, anything unambiguous. IT HAS TO BE RIDICULOUSLY EASY.
This is actually breaking my social network in practice. Inadvertent lockin is just as bad in its effects as deliberate lockin.
This suggestion:
Should be implemented as-is.
14 (35.0%)
Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
9 (22.5%)
Shouldn't be implemented.
7 (17.5%)
(I have no opinion)
9 (22.5%)
(Other: please comment)
1 (2.5%)
no subject
no subject
Hey ... what if the website field had some kinda AJAX-y thing where it auto-detected if the URL was to an OpenID-enabled site after you'd typed it in, and then let you know immediately afterwards if it'd work? This would especially help for if anonymous commenting was disabled; you'd type in your website, and if that didn't work you'd read the error message and maybe scan over a list of sites that would work, before deciding on one to enter.
no subject
As for only showing the chooser after someone put a website in…I don't think that reflects best/current practice of what websites are currently doing. Unless we have a way that is clearly better than the default, I think we should stick with what's common, because it is likely to be familiar.
The problem with having a blank website field still leaves the issue of, how do we communicate what to put in the blank?
no subject
Maybe have their website listed just as a text URL then, unless it's an OpenID? They could be listed as "So-and-so from http://example.com", instead of
The problem with having a blank website field still leaves the issue of, how do we communicate what to put in the blank?
I think the problem is communicating that we want anything more than just any old website. Blogger actually does this the best, I think, but their selection thing favors certain websites over others ... and a more comprehensive selection grid would a) look like NASCAR (as Matt Mullenweg put it) and b) inevitably leave tons of sites out.
My website actually uses a sort of AJAX-y thing, thanks to the WordPress OpenID plugin ... click here to take a look, if you'd like. What happens is after you've entered your website and tabbed down into the main body area, a checkbox appears that says "Authenticate your comment using OpenID." I think that's not very clear, and would like to change it to something like
Applying this idea to Dreamwidth, we could say that then if it bounces it goes ahead and posts the comment anyway if anonymous commenting is enabled, and has a bolded reminder something like
And if anonymous commenting is disabled, just remove the "Your comment was posted anonymously" bit.
I admit, this isn't how most websites that implement OpenID do it. The thing is, though, how many of them actually get people to comment using OpenID? And of those, how many people are using their "primary" websites, even if they may be OpenID-enabled, as opposed to a secondary site that was displayed more prominently like MySpace? By just asking for a personal URL, instead of presenting a NASCAR vehicle's worth of options, we make it more likely that they'll enter the URL to the website that they call home. Then after they comment, we can educate them about OpenID and how it either made their authenticated comment possible or its lack made it impossible.
no subject
This seems like it would be more clear...
Is there a "What's OpenID?" help-link anywhere for all that?
no subject
The idea I have in mind is that OpenID should not be a "brand name" so much as something to take for granted. The first prompt would set up the expectation in people's minds that they can use their account from another website (which they should be able to), and then the second would be a quick teaching moment to explain either how it happened or how it didn't.
The impression they should walk away with, I think, is not being confused by techie terminology but either being impressed ("Hey, I didn't know you could do that!") or annoyed with their home website ("How come they don't use this when all these websites do?")
no subject