Where do usabilists live?

    This is the essence of the question regarding this forum. The question turned out to be so voluminous that it ceased to fit into the question of the QA section, and turned into (another) journalistic article. One more - because there are enough articles already, they are read and they are well commented on (but the benefits are not the same). At the same time, for some reason it is impossible to reach the circle of usabilityists (after all, they must be on such and such a resource) to organize what we are going to here for - to get new knowledge and new solutions for web development.

    (Perhaps the problem is that so many readers expect to get ready-made solutions instead of taking part in the discussion?)

    So, there is a development, public, aimed at solving a socially useful goal (where else to discuss it, if not in a society of direct professionals). There are developments of living examples. But for some reason it is impossible to reach the circle of usabilityists who deal with similar problems for several months. After all, they should be, at least a little on the whole runet and Russian-speaking abroad. A couple of times the question was raised in the comments, with illustrations ( 1 , 2 ), in the discussion thread of feature articles. Not once has a discussion reached a single person who could give a full assessment leading to new ideas. Any discussion (and the last one , including) comes down to an assessment of “like - not like”.

    The last is especially impressive. The concept is presented, a tool of work is given, watch and participate. Results - the topic is confidently recessed in the cons of conservatives, for which it is not intended, and there are almost no real specialists (I saw one in the commentary who said that he would do this). At the very beginning, from the first words it was written: "An article for web designers and usability ...". An article for web designers and usability artists. To protect yourself from consumers, you need to hide ideas behind science-like reasoning?

    But let me, why physicists who do not have a hadron collider, get a lot of negative “dislike” ratings from physicists, but do they get usability schemes that need to be worked on? Or am I really, really not asking questions there? Or do not I clothe in the form of inaccessible science?

    Speaking of science.

    If you look at how other usabilityists and other social scientists, such as psychologists (or Louis Pasteur in the 19th century in microbiology) are promoting themselves, you can come to interesting conclusions. Jacob Nielsen. He systematically promotes himself and his ideas, starting with raising layers of users who cannot but agree and will always vote for the article “for!”. First, articles about the horrors of the ancient layout, then more and more until the foundation is cleared for new buildings. Then cautious advancement of other, but quite obvious ideas, which the majority cannot but agree with. We see a similar path with Lebedev. A long, long journey of self-affirmation and demonstration of common sense.

    Psychologists. To start talking about obvious things such as how to behave in society, you need to make science out of the subject. Enter 20 thousand French (mostly) terms, refer to the works of the founders, show outstanding erudition and a bright mind. Finally, they begin to believe, listen, finance and pay, inviting them to solve personal problems. Resonance on social issues finally gets its profit. We can see a similar way of becoming a science among astrologers and occultists, although this is a “slightly different” one.

    In total, we see that the normal way to be listened to is to light up with a scientific value in society, often choosing distant approaches for the siege of the fortress, and the goals can be completely different.

    Our goals are quite practical. Practical usability and user experience are required to build a better than it is, than we see in the mass of forums and here in particular. A normal scientific, research approach is required, and not a like-dislike vote. A ladder of journalistic articles from afar, like that of Jacob Nielsen, is not required. Science is not required, so we do not deal with it. I offer working tools in CSS and JS, which you can touch and draw conclusions, but they say to me, “like - don't like”. Moreover, the second - at least - twice as much, therefore, an attempt to get into the discussion of usability issues regularly, for the second time it’s been drowned by a mass of users who are counting on a tasty piece of bread, and not a piece of iron that needs to be cut.

    In other words, the discussion of working projects runs into drowning them in the negative opinion of the majority. Therefore, the question arose in the heading - where do those usabilityists who can perceive and who work with these ideas and tools live? How to protect yourself from the flow of users? CHADNT and CHADDT? The answer is approximately outlined by the previous reasoning, but I do not like this approach. Building a name for yourself is a long process and not related to a specific task. I would like to have a working environment where work tools are discussed. “Make a candy, and we will appreciate it” is also not a question. This should be a result that could be built together. In addition, you must first know the interests of a group of interested. Interested users may simply not exist; this is a law formulated by Ford when he made a car.

    So where do usabilists live? Participation in the development of ideas for the usability of the tree forum is required .

    Also popular now: