10 Things Your Web Site Should Be Doing Options

[cre8pc]

Inspiration by an article of the same name, by Nick Finck

Sadly, I shy away from this one:

\"A place for your site's users to offer feedback and input (blog comments, forums, etc.)\"

because I've received disgusting, crude and terribly upsetting feedback or comments. I can't think of a good reason to be subjected to hatred by leaving my front door open to it, so I no longer open the door.

Other suggestions I have for what a web should be doing (I don't like "shoulds", but prefer "might try" or "could" instead.

1. Add credibility elements such as testimonials, references, client list.

2. Accessibility. Keep enhancing and improving this area.

I'll let you all find and add more

[bwelford]

Kim, this triggered a thought I've been having recently. It's intriguing that the list is all techny and on mechanisms. There's nothing on content.

I get concerned about all the bandwith that's being used up on blog entries that just say "Hey, do you see what A said over there!" What I'm looking for in so many posts is ORIGINALITY. So I'll probably say this somewhere else, but I'm thinking we need an OR measure for blog entries. To my mind, this is much more important than PR or Page Rank for a blog entry. OR stands for Originality Rank. It's measured on a scale from 0 to 10. 10 is completely original. 0 is like the example above, pointing at someone else's blog entry.

So my nomination for the Number One entry on the list is: Blog Entries should have as much ORIGINALITY as possible. I guess it's unlikely that Google can come up with a measure of this too quickly. So I suggest for the moment we'll have to go with an Honour system (or an Honor system in the USA).

My proposal is that the title of every blog entry should start with the following, for example [OR=4]. This would mean that the author thinks that on the Originality scale, the posting ranks at about 4.

The benefits of this scheme are tremendous. Very busy people could arrange that their Bayesian filter for RSS newsfeeds would check only entries with OR greater than say 5.

So who will join me in the OR movement?

[peter_d]

While the article presents some good general ideas, they do need qualification. All those ideas present increased costs, and if the benefit is less than the cost, then every idea would become a bad business decision.

Again, I think it's best to approach this from the users perspective. Who are the users, what do they want, and what is a cost effective way of comminicating with them. The users might not want every communication option under the sun - it may be confusing. My mother doesn't care about RSS or SOAP, for example

The web should be placing the user at the center of the design process. Every interactive environment should.

[cre8pc]

Excellent points so far!

As for OR, I sorta have my own way of doing it. I link to those I like, therefore, they're an OR10 or at least 8 and up

[thirstymoose_2000]

It's intriguing that the list is all techny and on mechanisms.

Noticed that too Barry. My ten things your web site should be doing woudl be far different than his. And like you, I would be far more concerned with the content than the mark-up.

This article reminds me of all the 'designers' in the mid 90's who belonged to the HTML Writers Guild. Their 'design' was all about writing proper mark-up and there was very little attention to the content that was going up.

And your comment about BLOGS, I agree. I very often link to other articles, news or information from mine, but I always add my own spin, critique or anacdote to my entry. And usually the topic matter is something that I wanted to discuss anyway.

[RonZ]

On Originality:

I don't mind the entries that are just references to others' work when the work is actually interesting and relevant to the sight referring it. I much prefer comments with the reference stating why it might be interesting and what the referring person thinks about it...

There's original meaning not substantially derivative or a previous work, and then there's original meaning new. There's not much interesting out there that's completely new. Lots that's presented as such when it's obviously not. I much prefer insightful works that introduce new and useful perspectives and insights into other works, especially from a good analyis of multiple works.

[Paul_H]

1. Add credibility elements such as testimonials

How do people feel about testimonials?
Often seems that the less sure i am about a product the more testimonials they seem to have. Maybe it’s just the products i shop for, but testimonials don’t appear as popular on UK sites – seem to be a quite a few difference between how US sites sell compared to the UK or is that just me?

Do people actually believe testimonials are genuine or is everyone else as sceptical as me? The only testimonials i believe are where i actually know the site owner from forums etc. I’m so sceptical i find they have a negative impact. Am i just grumpy old man or does anyone think this?

[James]

My personal view is that unless you are given enough information to contact the person providing the testimonial to check its authenticity, they hold little credibility. Testimonials from Fred from Surrey are very likely to hold little water. I know of one ecommerce site where the testiminial writers all made similar grammatical errors to the site's owners! I didn't realise just how many people learnt ENglish from their favourite sites.

So are they a blessing or a curse? Hmmm, I veer towards the latter. I've seen too many 'get rich quick scheme' sites with testimonials sputing off how easy it was to make a fast buck.

Clearly some testimonials carry some weight. They tend to be written by people you know, often well-respected experts in their field. Examples include the testiminials that cre8pc gets for her ebooks.

In terms of ecommerce sites, I prefer to read genuine 3rd party reviews of the site's services such as those posted on Ciao and Dooyoo (or at least when they were review sites rather than price comparison sites!) by respected reviewers. Where a reviewer has only written one review and it is for an ecommerce site, I tend to take those with a pinch of salt too.

[TheManBehindTheCurtain]

I'm similarly underwhelmed by the "10 Things Your Web Site Should Be Doing." It should more accurately be labeled "10 Cool and Geeky Things I'm Personally Interested In."

I agree with the concerns about originality and content. One fallout of the blog phenomenon is that there are more people writing blogs than there are original thoughts or ideas floating around in them. This leads some to try to grab attention by making outrageous statements, or simply lapsing into unsubstantiated, superficial bluster. On the other hand, in general I do love the way the Internet and blogs have democratized speech and opinion, and we must learn to live with the downsides in return. I suspect a lot of the people who have nothing to say will eventually get tired of the thankless task of trying to come up with something they think original, will realize that this feels a lot like doing real work, and will just fade away. Especially once they learn that fame is not around the corner; no one will recognize them at the local bar/pub, and groupies will not be following them around asking for their autograph and offering to do what groupies do. Hopefully, eventually some advanced link-popularity and other IA analysis of the blogosphere will help sort the wheat from the chaff, and maybe a few bloggers will some day become as well known as those officious, demeaning TV commentators.

Also agree re: endorsements. Endorsements work best (that is, they only work at all) when the endorser is either a well known and authoritative expert in the field, or someone whose title indicates they have an understanding or genuine stake in the product, service, etc. being endorsed. And prospective customers should have a way to confirm the endorsement and potentially speak with the endorser. This sets the bar pretty high for endorsements, but it's the only genuine way they can prove value. Still, of course, many web visitors don't have such high standards, so companies will still tend to use what works. (I don't mean to sound negative, but I think the theme I'm feeling this morning is, "we get the type of web we deserve.")

[cre8pc]

I think this is fascinating feedback. I mean, this is a list by

Nick Finck

I'm sure there's more to his overall wish list for web sites than this list, but at the same time, I think it's interesting the things he's promoting here.

He says these things are a must for the "modern world" web site. Really?

And if a site doesn't have this modern stuff, it's ???

Ok what to do, what to do. Get the plasma TV, or hire a progammer...

[James]

I'll confess that I've only just read his Nick's list. It smacks of a techno-geek who understands more about technology than how to use technology to offer an improved user experience.

Here's my top 10 list (in particular order). Nothing earth-shattering.

1. Ensure that you make your USP/benefits clear on every page
2. Ensure that provide improved ways in which your visitors can contact you
3. Improve the quality of the information on your site such that they can make informed purchasing decisions
4. Ensure that your site is accessible to all visitors and search engines
5. Add new ways of delivering content to 3rd parties
6. Improve conversion through removing unnecessary registration and requests for too much information
7. Offer greater customer service through not only meeting ecommerce regulations but surpassing them
8. Improve the site such that it offers an improved user-experience
9. Stop worrying about page rank and start focusing on customers
10. Take time to understand how visitors use your site and learn from that knowledge

[Renee]

I'm not a proficient web designer, but to me, designers like Nick Finck are saying that form is more important than the content. In the bricks and mortar world, it would be putting the design of the building before what that store's customers need so they can easily find and purchase goods and having a responsive customer support system for when they can't find what they want.

James' list brings it back to basics. If I see a beautifully designed site, but can't get the info or service I need because it doesn't exist or is problematical, my initial emotion of delight quickly turns to a brisk "next" and an immediate click away from the site.

IMHO, design exists to support, not supplant, information.

Renee

[RonZ]

How do people feel about testimonials?

http://skepdic.com/testimon.html

Testimonials are very effective at influencing people! Given that the quality of information related in testimonials is close to nil, I recommend being highly skeptical of all testimonials, anyone who uses testimonials as a primary form of persuasion about their products or services, and anyone who advises using testimonials in such a manner.

[Dr_Livingston]

What I think may be a better idea is that a prospective client contacts you, offer to pass on a previous clients phone number so your soon-to-be client can verify your credibility.

Of course, you'd check with your prior clients to make sure that this is save to do so I never pay any attention on testimonials regardless of how well they come across.

That way it's a benifit to you as you can then be selective

[dlumerman]

Food for thought in a blue sky.

If you can't Inspire...
Illuminate,
Inform,
Include,

at the very least...Sell

David Lumerman
Usability Forum & Reviews

[thirstymoose_2000]

I'm similarly underwhelmed by the \"10 Things Your Web Site Should Be Doing.\" It should more accurately be labeled \"10 Cool and Geeky Things I'm Personally Interested In.\"

Ha ha! Yeah, too many designers design this way too --- for their own interest.