Comment by glenstein

11 days ago

I definitely think it's partly that, but I do think visual redesigns also really strike something primal in the brains of an internet user for whatever reason.

This will expose my internet user age but I remember Marcos Moulitsas talking about DailyKos redesigns, and he noted, correctly I think, that regardless of what you do, a visual redesign will be interpreted as an apocalyptic event to approximately 1/3 of the user base. But it tends to be a flame that burns bright but brief.

Or for another version: there was a time in the history of Facebook where redesigns to the desktop version caused user outrage and mass organization into aggressively titled Facebook groups, protesting for a change. Now I personally think that in many significant respects Zuckerberg is a fool, his investment in meta and VR has been a joke and his perspectives on AI are naive. But I actually think the design and iteration of Facebook itself has been a savvy series of careful iterations, and going this long without shooting himself in the foot is not something to be taken for granted.

Anyway, my point is as a going concern whenever you do a redesign you have to price in a certain amount of recreational outrage from a percentage of the user base that burns bright but brief.

> But it tends to be a flame that burns bright but brief.

That just means that, once it's been established that you're ignoring them, everybody who vocally hated the new design will switch to silent resentment of you for what you did, forever and ever.

  • Or that given time to breathe and reflect, people realize their reaction was disproportionate to the perceived offense.