|
|
|
|
|
|
by andros
1 day ago
|
|
|
I'm sorry, but I disagree. The lowest interaction cost is scrolling; it's a natural, continuous, and almost involuntary gesture. Having to click or tap a button requires the user to stop, evaluate whether the title interests them, and decide to make the effort to tap. The interactions you're describing are intentional and measured. I'm sorry but if the content is truly all you care about, I recommend the previous option or activating your browser's reading mode. |
|
|
Exactly, which is why attaching large UI shifts to that involuntary gesture makes the experience feel very unpredictable
> activating your browser's reading mode
Reading mode is a hack that's only needed because sites aren't already readable. You shouldn't have to activate it to be able to read the content.
In addition, it doesn't always work well if the website didn't test it. On your website, for example, it removes all images from the text.
> Having to click or tap a button requires the user to stop, evaluate whether the title interests them
Purposefully doing things in a way that doesn't let the user decide if they want it is called a dark pattern. Its not far from those checkboxes that try to trick you into accepting marketing newsletters. "We can't give users an option to think if they want our emails! If they don't, why don't they just use their email's spam filtering?"
You may not see it like that yourself, but huge links to your CV, talks and courses are exactly that - an ad that covers half the screen.
You have multiple people telling you the experience is bad, and you asked for why, but when people give you the explanation you argue back. That's fine of course, it's your own site and you can do whatever you like with it without trying to suit anyone. But that doesn't make the reader experience less bad.