Sign Up Forms Must Die
alistapart.com
alistapart.com
Some of the sites that do "gradual engagement" piss me off when they let me believe I'm about to do something and then surprise me with a sign up form. It strikes me as tricky and I very frequently walk away.
I certainly believe it's smart to let users do as much as possible without requiring them to sign up. I think the idea of signing up is pretty ingrained in people though. If you make it dead simple (like this site or reddit) it's not much of a barrier and it keeps things straightforward.
You have a guest id with no questions asked that lets do everything on the site. You can keep it forever if you come back at least once every two weeks. You only have to join if you want to have your own subdomain - and we ask you for the name and a password - that's it.
An interesting idea, but it would probably deter casual commenters. People who drop by, see something interesting and want to add their two cents, sign their anonymous comment, and leave it at that.
It's a bit of a stretch, possibly, but track users and pester them gently if they comment several times anonymously. Something like "hey, I've noticed you've been around for awhile, if you sign up, you'll get these perks. Would you like to?"
http://qdb.us/latest does SOMETHING like this. It's a quotes database and after you've browsed around awhile it puts a non-intrusive nag-message at the top of the screen directing you to the FAQ. Maybe something similar to direct people to a signup form?
And if I click on Create, it say "see, that was easy". It certainly was, but what was IT exactly ? :)
Then at top left there is a "claim this site" to declare your ownership on it -but you don't have to.
Jottit: a great paste bin. Among other things.
You get a pretty good idea if HN is worth it by reading the posts and comments from others. If you like what you see and would like to contribute then sign up. Nothing wrong with that. It would be great to allow anonymous submissions and comments but unfortunately this is very likely to lead to abuse.
"It’s only when you want to publish or share your movie that Jumpcut asks for your name and email so you and others can access the movie you just made."
I -hate- the web experience this article describes. If you're going to make me sign up to use your service, tell me. Don't string me along and waste my time.
The point the author seems to be making: let people know what they're getting before you make them sign up. Well, I think Google Video does a pretty good job at that. And I can -view- any video I want to without signing up. Is that "gradual engagement"? If so, why is it being criticized? If not, how is it different?
In fact, the more I think about this, the more the practice counters the principle. The principle seems to be (and ought to be), "Let your potential customers know what they're getting right away." Google Video does that. And if I ever want to go 'deeper' (from watching videos to posting them, or collecting them), I know right away that I need to sign up.
On the other hand, to _view_ the video I've spent the last however long _making_ on JumpCut, I get SURPRISED by a registration form. Plus, why would I need to register to -see- a video. I can understand needing to register to post or save a video, but to see it? I'd argue, then, that Google Video actually does a -better- job delaying the registration component than any of these examples.
And they're up-front about it from the start.
For Jumpcut, the real value in letting the user upload and edit a video is to get a feel for the video editing functionality without having to sign up, (since the video editing is really their selling point). If the user likes what they've created they can sign up to post it. This is key. Let the user try out the idea of your site without signing up. You can then require them to signup if they like it and want to keep their work.
Recently there was another post where somebody had a startup that had some cool way to learn a foreign language http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=144998
I wanted to check it out but had to sign up to really see how it all worked. So I left.
But I'm sure you were just poking fun, so poke away, haha.
Instead what we do is tell them to add a bot to their buddy list and send it a greeting. In doing this, they've already engaged in the service, and we have created an entry in our users database based on their buddy name and chat network. They can then decide whether supply additional information.
There are lots of ways to lower the barrier to entry if you're willing to change the way you think about online services.
For instance, if I were to use an app to share photos (a la flickr), and I was invited to upload a bunch of photos then be presented with "Ok, now you've got to sign up RIGHT NOW or we'll delete everything you just did" - that's sorta missing the point. That's less gradual engagement and more impending doom.
The implementation of the chatbot above seems to be more along the right lines, though. The holy grail perhaps would be allowing the user to fully engage with the service without even realising it.
Another issue is accountability. If someone is abusing my service, I want to be able to ban them from ruining things for everyone else. If you look at sign up forms in terms of security, the psychological acceptability of filling out a form and providing an e-mail address is actually quite high compared to more robust ways of verifying identity (driver's license, social security number, etc).
I'm curious, because I hate CAPTCHAs, but only slightly less than I hate being used as a splog.
I think it might, so I'm feeling happy.
If the data is impersonal enough you can add a "Whoops, lost you work? Click here to see recent orphans" link.
If that's the case, it speeds up the registration process by a lot, and _nearly_ replaces it. (not quite since I'd need a username)
I think many sites require extranenous registration information just because other sites request the same information. It also gives them the option of analysis at a later date.
Some companies may actually use the information they collect for data mining or to resell. Even though this can sometimes have evil purposes, sometimes it can be beneficial for a company to say Paul Graham really likes chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream and its his birthday, but for most places collecting this information is of little use. It's just annoying for the user, as the many replies to this news posting can attest to.