= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nevin comments on Open Thread: April 2010, Part 2 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (194)
The map image in the masthead confused me when I found LW, and might reduce the probability that casual Web-browsing would-be-rationalists would take the time to understand what LW actually is before moving on.
I'm new to the community; this post may not be structured like the ones you're used to. Bear with me.
If LW is anything like the few sites whose analytics numbers I've seen, a significant portion of traffic comes from Web searches (I would wildly guess 10-30% of their pageviews). According to the analytics I've seen on my own site, out of those landings from Google et. al., many are likely to stay only for a few seconds, presumably trying to see if they've found what they're looking for.
[In my opinion] the name, small grey welcome box for new readers, and the tagline under the logo collectively do a good job of explaining what LW is, even for people who aren't familiar with any related terminology or concepts. The image of a map in the background, [in my opinion], does not. When I first arrived I thought for a few moments it was a site about maps. I ended up reading enough to stick around, but I wonder if some don't.
I would like to ask people who didn't understand what the site was about and didn't return to LW if the image was the reason... but we'll never hear from them. So instead, I invite people here to chime in about whether or not the image deterred them at first, and whether it is something worth re-thinking.
[Whether this potential deterrent is bad is a separate question; I'm just curious about whether it even is a deterrent. I can see arguments for trying to deter people (or certain types of people) intentionally, but I suppose that's irrelevant if the image doesn't affect the probability that first-time readers will return.]
An anecdote:
When I've had people shoulder surf while I was visiting the site, everyone asked, "LessWrong? What's that supposed to mean?" (5+ people). When I explained that it was a rational community where people tried to improve their thinking, they immediately began status attacks against me. One used the phrase "uber-intellectual blog" in a derogatory context and another even asked, "Are you going to come into work with a machine gun?" They often laughed at the concept.
Nobody commented on the graphic.
You probably need a new set of friends/relatives/coworkers.
New set of relatives. I suppose that is one reason to parent children: "My last family members were a bunch of @#%s. I'm making some new ones!"
I consider them to be "normal people." Anti-intellectualism is very popular, and I'm already known for being interested in unusual topics. Once I've trained them to respond appropriately, we tend to have good discussions.
It didn't deter me, but I didn't get it until someone explained it just recently. For a while, I was just thinking "What's that a map of? Is that where FHI is based? Is it the area in Santa Clara surrounding the SIAI House? Whatever it's a map of, is is relevant enough to put it at the top of every page?" (Actual answer from a minute googling street names: it's in San Francisco, but I don't know if there's any reason this particular location was chosen.)
O'course, even for those who get it, it may not be the best illustration of the map/territory distinction, because the lower half isn't the territory either. It's just a more detailed map than the top half. Ceci n'est pas le territoire!
Anyway, I doubt it will actively deter many people, but there are probably better possibilities.
Actually, regarding "Ceci n'est pas...", The Treachery of Images is a pretty good illustration of the map/territory distinction. But it probably wouldn't make a great masthead.
There's also a significant percentage of traffic that comes from Stumble Upon. Not sure how we can better optimize for people arriving for Stumble Upon, but certainly the current state is not ideal.
There is a possibility of presenting different pages to people depending on their referrers...
The map-territory metaphor is pretty central to what goes on here, so I kind of like it. I don't really know if it is a deterrent. Any alternatives in mind?
I do think the logo could be a map of somewhere more interesting than Candlestick Park! And maybe a cooler place would keep googler's around. Or make it look a dojo.
The first thing that comes to mind is having no masthead image. Any image will presumably be misunderstood by some fraction of visitors, but the text alone is very clear. I can see why people like the current image; perhaps a solution is to replace it with a solid color for people arriving from Google or StumbleUpon.
I have to admit I'd never really consciously noticed the image until someone recently pointed out that it symbolizes the map/territory distinction. I guess that is evidence that is not very eye catching or distinctive but neither is it particularly off-putting in my opinion.