On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop>
wrote:
On 10/20/2015 10:09 AM, Stephen Michel wrote:
!IMPORTANT!
First: I propose we set a Design Freeze Deadline of next MONDAY,
OCT 26
for the mechanism. After that date, the design shall be locked in.
I agree with all these items.
I'm going to go ahead and update the beta-sprint wiki page with this
date, assuming nobody else objects.
Therefore, I propose the following:
Show 4 donation levels.
I *like* the familiar idea of a few simple donation levels in
principle.
1. Minimum. Currently $1 per 1000 users.
2. Average. This shall be the default / recommended. It is
completely
clear how we came to it, is not artificially manipulated (except
for the
first user) and provides a higher-than-minimum donation level to
help
projects get off the ground.
It's not clear to me whether pledging today's average is a set pledge
at
that level or if it will adjust itself automatically to follow
whatever
is the average going forward. That confusion itself leads to weird
issues.
It would be today's average, and not automatically follow the running
average. 'Follow the average' introduces too much complexity, I think.
I also think your issue has to do with this specific mockup (which is
this way because it's on a white board), not with the idea in general.
I'd image a final product would look more like one of these:
/-------------------------\
| **$5 per 1000** |
| (current average) |
\-------------------------/
/---------------------------\
| Recommended (?) |
| **$5 per 1000** |
\---------------------------/
On mouseover: (?) Current average donation.
I don't mind the idea of showing, "the current average is 0.5ยข per
patron" or something and having that as an option as long as the
option
is labeled with the number clearly as a fixed pledge.
3. Double the average. Provides an option for generous donors
(rather
than forcing them to decide on a value themselves).
Not sure about the "double" idea.
It's just filling in for the idea of some higher donation value. double
seemed reasonable in the context of this mockup. Just to re-iterate:
I'm pitching an idea, not a final product. All these little details can
be modified as we're implementing,
4. User-entered. Must be minimum or higher (duh). Provides an
option for
*extra* generous donors, or those who wish to donate less but not
the
minimum.
Here's a whiteboard sketch I drew of how this might look. I *really*
don't think this is unduly complicated.
https://img.bi/#/818IWCe!tXPyBZZ4M1n2oqQeZNDSgAtSgOzD44fyGhFBFW6u
~Stephen
So, overall, I think a few options like this is both ideal in
principle
and is familiar. However, I see the point that because this is a new
system, people will have very poor sense of the ramification of each
level. I could imagine people entering $1 per patron and then running
out of funds quickly. I think it's *okay* to risk some confusion while
we clearly state that this is beta, things are in flux, we may adapt
as
we go. I think that within the core idea, we *can* launch without
getting this perfect as long as we make it clear that things are not
fully pinned down.
That said, I think there's some sense to perhaps making this less
confusing by just offering a few set levels without an arbitrary
open-ended box, and skipping the "average" thing.
The average is there in accordance with premise 5: All things equal,
we'd prefer to allow the mechanism to function naturally rather than
with our intervention.
We don't know exactly what will end up making sense as a donation level
for a given project. What if it turns out project A is really valuable
but only to a niche audience, so the optimal situation is a group of
1000 people giving 10 cents per patron. It would be kind of silly if we
only offered donations at a level of .1, .2, and .5 cents per patron. A
solution that relies on the average (an average solution, heh) works
regardless of how a project's support base turns out. And of course
we'll always have the minimum there so it's not like the average should
be restrictive if it's high.
I also highly suspect that I and other members will want to make a
large donation to start with to help the project get off the ground
faster and then lessen it as the community grows and that level of
support is no longer needed (or sustainable). And I know that runs
counter to the entire idea of quadratic growth, but that's a
conversation for a different thread.
An open box like that allows for, say, a company to donate using the
same mechanism as an individual, rather than needing its own. It also
allows for a weird situation like above, where someone less wealthy
wanted to join in to a project with an absurdly high average donation,
but without donating the minimum. Plus, it doesn't make sense to have
an average box unless there's an easy way to affect the average, ie, by
choosing your donation level.
I'm not opposed to making the "choose your own" option less prominent
(ie, not in a box, just text at the bottom that makes a box appear when
you click it, or something). Again, this was just a basic mockup, to
see if we can all get on board the idea of those 4 basic categories of
donation (low/minimum, average, above average, custom).
I don't think we need to worry about people entering things like $1 per
patron in the custom field for two reasons:
- They have the average / recommended donation levels as a guide. If
you see a recommendation of X, you're not going to typing in 500X,
where money is concerned.
- We can tweak the interface, for example, so it's in terms of dollars
per 1000 patrons rather than dollars per Patron, as needed to make it
clear just how much you're donating.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
