Gee, maybe Signal shouldn’t keep harassing people to turn on notifications and take no for an answer?
-
RE: https://infosec.exchange/@molytov/116376968214888959
Gee, maybe Signal shouldn’t keep harassing people to turn on notifications and take no for an answer?
Thoughts, @Mer__edith?
-
RE: https://infosec.exchange/@molytov/116376968214888959
Gee, maybe Signal shouldn’t keep harassing people to turn on notifications and take no for an answer?
Thoughts, @Mer__edith?
@aral I must not see what you see (but also don't understand the logic in having a messaging app with no notifications; how would you know somebody messaged or called?)
last time I installed, I set notifications (just show there is one, do not show details) and that's the last I've ever seen or heard about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
RE: https://infosec.exchange/@molytov/116376968214888959
Gee, maybe Signal shouldn’t keep harassing people to turn on notifications and take no for an answer?
Thoughts, @Mer__edith?
@aral @Mer__edith I have notifications enabled without showing any content so I don't experience such persistent messages, but I've seen several comments from people complaining about Signal constantly trying to get them to enable notifications so I don't doubt that is the case. The user makes a conscious choice to enable or disable notifications and they have their reasons for whatever they choose; an app bombarding them with demands to have an option be set a certain way isn't respecting of their decision.
-
@aral I must not see what you see (but also don't understand the logic in having a messaging app with no notifications; how would you know somebody messaged or called?)
last time I installed, I set notifications (just show there is one, do not show details) and that's the last I've ever seen or heard about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@darkuncle “Yes / Ask me again later” is a hostile design pattern that shows a profound lack of respect for consent. Signal should be doing better.
You do not know better than the person making the decision whether or not they want notifications on.
(The opposite of “yes” is “no”.)
CC @Mer__edith
-
@aral @Mer__edith I have notifications enabled without showing any content so I don't experience such persistent messages, but I've seen several comments from people complaining about Signal constantly trying to get them to enable notifications so I don't doubt that is the case. The user makes a conscious choice to enable or disable notifications and they have their reasons for whatever they choose; an app bombarding them with demands to have an option be set a certain way isn't respecting of their decision.
@molytov @Mer__edith This.
-
@darkuncle “Yes / Ask me again later” is a hostile design pattern that shows a profound lack of respect for consent. Signal should be doing better.
You do not know better than the person making the decision whether or not they want notifications on.
(The opposite of “yes” is “no”.)
CC @Mer__edith
@aral @Mer__edith Where do you see this? I’m with @darkuncle - I turned set my notification settings and haven’t been asked by the app again.
-
@aral I must not see what you see (but also don't understand the logic in having a messaging app with no notifications; how would you know somebody messaged or called?)
last time I installed, I set notifications (just show there is one, do not show details) and that's the last I've ever seen or heard about it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@darkuncle @aral I imagine if I were to disable notifications, it would be because I intend to only engage with the app on my terms rather than having the app try to get my attention, perhaps away from other things I want to be focused on instead.
But that isn't actually relevant to the problem. A user doesn't owe anyone justification for how they set something up for themselves, and an app should be something that accommodates their needs, rather than demanding certain behaviour from them.
And like Aral said, the option isn't just a one-time "Yes" and "No" - as in "Alright, I'll enable notifications" vs "No, I want to keep them disabled" - it only has "Not now", which means the app will continue to send the prompt in the future, which does not respect the user's choice.
-
@darkuncle “Yes / Ask me again later” is a hostile design pattern that shows a profound lack of respect for consent. Signal should be doing better.
You do not know better than the person making the decision whether or not they want notifications on.
(The opposite of “yes” is “no”.)
CC @Mer__edith
@aral I guess I haven't seen that particular design pattern (just disabled notifications, restarted Signal, and got prompted -- "not now / enable" -- so yeah, confirming what you see. It's IMO on a par with prodding the user about their PIN, which is at worst mildly annoying but serves a useful purpose).
(I still maintain that a messaging app that supports audio and video calls, but has no notifications enabled, is effectively useless -- but end users should have the option to choose that. I'd argue a better UX here would be "yes / no / ask me later" and if you pick "no" you get an explicit warning that you will never be notified of any incoming calls or messages; at least that way unsophisticated users are aware of the risks and sophisticated ones can still make that tradeoff.
Tradeoffs are really key here, and we should support maximum end user control while also being very explicit about tradeoffs to avoid surprises.)
-
@darkuncle @aral I imagine if I were to disable notifications, it would be because I intend to only engage with the app on my terms rather than having the app try to get my attention, perhaps away from other things I want to be focused on instead.
But that isn't actually relevant to the problem. A user doesn't owe anyone justification for how they set something up for themselves, and an app should be something that accommodates their needs, rather than demanding certain behaviour from them.
And like Aral said, the option isn't just a one-time "Yes" and "No" - as in "Alright, I'll enable notifications" vs "No, I want to keep them disabled" - it only has "Not now", which means the app will continue to send the prompt in the future, which does not respect the user's choice.@molytov @aral when you are maintaining an app that supports both sophisticated and novice users, you sometimes have to make a decision between user choice and minimizing user risks due to tradeoffs they did not consider. (e.g., my mom last week calling me to figure out why she missed texts from her friend group all the time, and then we realized she had somehow muted the chat but did not realize.)
that said: we should be supporting user choice, while simultaneously being explicit about tradeoffs and risks. both these things are possible, and in this case I'd add "no" in addition to "yes" and "ask me later", and when selecting "no" would warn the user that all incoming calls and messages would be silent, and is that what they want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
@aral @Mer__edith Where do you see this? I’m with @darkuncle - I turned set my notification settings and haven’t been asked by the app again.
-
@aral I guess I haven't seen that particular design pattern (just disabled notifications, restarted Signal, and got prompted -- "not now / enable" -- so yeah, confirming what you see. It's IMO on a par with prodding the user about their PIN, which is at worst mildly annoying but serves a useful purpose).
(I still maintain that a messaging app that supports audio and video calls, but has no notifications enabled, is effectively useless -- but end users should have the option to choose that. I'd argue a better UX here would be "yes / no / ask me later" and if you pick "no" you get an explicit warning that you will never be notified of any incoming calls or messages; at least that way unsophisticated users are aware of the risks and sophisticated ones can still make that tradeoff.
Tradeoffs are really key here, and we should support maximum end user control while also being very explicit about tradeoffs to avoid surprises.)
@darkuncle Here’s what it looks like: https://infosec.exchange/@molytov/116377085436505039
-
@molytov @aral when you are maintaining an app that supports both sophisticated and novice users, you sometimes have to make a decision between user choice and minimizing user risks due to tradeoffs they did not consider. (e.g., my mom last week calling me to figure out why she missed texts from her friend group all the time, and then we realized she had somehow muted the chat but did not realize.)
that said: we should be supporting user choice, while simultaneously being explicit about tradeoffs and risks. both these things are possible, and in this case I'd add "no" in addition to "yes" and "ask me later", and when selecting "no" would warn the user that all incoming calls and messages would be silent, and is that what they want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@darkuncle @aral Absolutely. I think the solution for such an issue would be to properly communicate what an option means so that the user can make a proper decision.
One possible tactic that comes to mind is if a user opts to not enable notifications from the prompt, display a second prompt along the lines of "Are you sure? You won't get notified and will have to open the app to check messages. You can change this option in this menu later." and lock the confirmation and cancellation options behind a 3-5 second timer so that the user is more likely to actually read the warning and not thoughtlessly tap the confirm option just to get rid of it. I don't have years of experience designing and testing UX though so there's probably better ways to accomplish the goal.
-
@darkuncle @aral Absolutely. I think the solution for such an issue would be to properly communicate what an option means so that the user can make a proper decision.
One possible tactic that comes to mind is if a user opts to not enable notifications from the prompt, display a second prompt along the lines of "Are you sure? You won't get notified and will have to open the app to check messages. You can change this option in this menu later." and lock the confirmation and cancellation options behind a 3-5 second timer so that the user is more likely to actually read the warning and not thoughtlessly tap the confirm option just to get rid of it. I don't have years of experience designing and testing UX though so there's probably better ways to accomplish the goal.
-
@darkuncle “Yes / Ask me again later” is a hostile design pattern that shows a profound lack of respect for consent. Signal should be doing better.
You do not know better than the person making the decision whether or not they want notifications on.
(The opposite of “yes” is “no”.)
CC @Mer__edith
@aral @darkuncle @Mer__edith please help me
-
@darkuncle “Yes / Ask me again later” is a hostile design pattern that shows a profound lack of respect for consent. Signal should be doing better.
You do not know better than the person making the decision whether or not they want notifications on.
(The opposite of “yes” is “no”.)
CC @Mer__edith
But come on, Eileen! Please.
-
RE: https://infosec.exchange/@molytov/116376968214888959
Gee, maybe Signal shouldn’t keep harassing people to turn on notifications and take no for an answer?
Thoughts, @Mer__edith?
@Mer__edith Oh, and would you look at that, right on cue…
The opposite of “yes” is “no”, not “not now” or “ask me later”.
#hostileDesign #consent #Signal #design #theOppositeOfYesIsNo
-
@Mer__edith Oh, and would you look at that, right on cue…
The opposite of “yes” is “no”, not “not now” or “ask me later”.
#hostileDesign #consent #Signal #design #theOppositeOfYesIsNo
@Mer__edith @aral there should be a special place in hell for developers who have yes and later as options…
-
@Mer__edith Oh, and would you look at that, right on cue…
The opposite of “yes” is “no”, not “not now” or “ask me later”.
#hostileDesign #consent #Signal #design #theOppositeOfYesIsNo
@Mer__edith No, thank you. Please don’t.
Behind every app that won’t take “no” for an answer, there’s a developer that doesn’t understand the concept of consent.
This is a legacy anti-feature, implemented at a time before Signal’s new leadership. I expect better, going forward.
-
@Mer__edith Oh, and would you look at that, right on cue…
The opposite of “yes” is “no”, not “not now” or “ask me later”.
#hostileDesign #consent #Signal #design #theOppositeOfYesIsNo
I noticed that too.
Also in other recent micro annoyance news; are ads now playing out in full on youtube and elsewhere before the option to 'skip' is offered?
or is that just me?
-
@Mer__edith Oh, and would you look at that, right on cue…
The opposite of “yes” is “no”, not “not now” or “ask me later”.
#hostileDesign #consent #Signal #design #theOppositeOfYesIsNo
@aral @Mer__edith to me its a sign of enshittification, see this classic example from Microsoft if you dare to use the web interface via a browser
