most people who actually have done usability testing discover that almost nobody *reads* documentation (even readme files), though some people attempt to refer to them to answer questions. they instead prefer to use well-developed intuitions. what happens when the software is counterintuitive is called "cognitive friction" by alan cooper (cited below).
i don't know about you, but this guy vented about some of the problems i've had to address prior to deploying sa in several enterprises as big as 1500 mailboxes. when we encounter software we perceive as crappy, it's perfectly correct, imho, to complain to the source, whether the source is microsoft, or, as in this case, a bunch of volunteers attempting to do collaborative design. you can't blame everything on isp sysadmins doing a naive installation. they are victims of bad software as well. don't blame the victims. listen to them. if this subject interests you, i recommend to your attention alan cooper's fine book, "The inmates are running the asylum -- Why high-tech products drive us crazy and how to restore the sanity" SAMS, 1999, ISBN 0-672-31649-8 On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 08:58:42PM -0500, Bob Apthorpe wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2003 12:14:35 -0700 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > sure he can complain to his isp, but... > > > > i am amazed that, in this day and age, software developers will not > > listen to usability complaints for what they are (referring to the > > several replies to this note already posted on this list). > > > > it would suggest, or you could infer, that the default installation > > parameters, which involve making suspected spam into attachments to > > marginally readable reports about the reasoning of a program may be an > > unpopular choice or wrongheaded. > > > > sometimes "improvements" with little user testing are not so. > > > > i would prefer more compatibility between dot versions, with optional > > behavior controlled by flags which are *not* the default. > > > > treat user feedback as valuable information, please. > > I don't see this as a usability issue or anything resembling useful user > feedback. It's an angry man venting, apparently one who can't/won't read > every instruction provided him. > > To give him some credit, I read the SA report attached to the email. > This is the text inserted into messages tagged as spam (I'm running > 2.55): > > "This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached > along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted > mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details." > > This message hasn't changed substantially in over a year (see below for > a trip through my archives of spam.) > > If you read http://spamassassin.org/tag/, you'll see no mention of the > mailing list but plenty of statements that boil down to "Please contact > your ISP if you are directed to this page." That's what it says now; The > Wayback Machine > (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://spamassassin.org/tag/) has two > other versions (Feb 12, 2002 and June 5, 2002) that are substantially > identical - mostly missing the big note to read the page fully and then > contact your ISP. > > Even going to http://spamassassin.org, there's no blinking neon arrow to > the SAtalk list, certainly not one that says "Vent your frustrations > here!" > > If naive users/victims are being directed to this list, I'd like to see > how. You have to work very hard to get to this mailing list and you have > to ignore an awful lot of pointers to the solution to the problem. So > while I sympathize with naive users, I can't shed too many tears for > those that complain at the mailing list as their first course of action. > > Or, less compassionately, ... > > <sarcasm type="extreme"> > Dear SpamAssassinator, > > I really didn't appreciate your response to Angry Semi-Coherent > Non-Subscriber #473 (aka my Aunt Martha) this week. You're a > pasty-skinned technogeek with bad eyesight and a brain the size of a > family-sized watermelon - how can you possibly see through the eyes of > poor Aunt Martha, who's still scared of the microwave oven and who, by > all generous accounts, has a brain the size of a brazil nut, bless her > technophobic heart? > > How can you be so rude to her and discount her perfectly valid if not > precisely comprehensible criticism of your software? Somehow she's > managed to find the SAtalk mailing list and accuse some amorphous 'you' > of control-freakery and some ill-defined conspiracy to bugger her email. > Or something. You really owe her a polite, literate, hand-holding > response, despite her inability to read or comprehend any direction > provided to her in her buggered email, on the website, everywhere. > > -- Miffed in Mequon > > Dear Miffed, > > You're right, we should at least be polite and literate and assume the > best of her. Perhaps some freak lighning storm off the Azores caused > Akamai to accidentally redirect her to the SAtalk mailing list, or maybe > the phrase "please talk to your system administrator or ISP support > desk" actually translates to "please vent your spleen at the SAtalk > mailing list" in her native Boetian. However she found the list, she's > here now. We have no excuse for being rude. > > Of course, neither does she. And as I recall, Aunt Martha is from > Oconomowoc, not Boetia, so despite her thick Wisconsin accent, she > should've been able to parse and internalize the eight or so references > to "your ISP is responsible for using SpamAssassin, contact them first" > on http://spamassassin.org/tag/. I hear Wisconsin's schools are pretty > decent, and I believe they speak English. They my even read and write > it. > > But as far as understanding Aunt Martha goes, I think two salient points > emerge - first, she's not willing to read (she can write so I presume > she can read) and follow directions, and second, she'd much rather > complain than try to get her problem solved, whatever it is. The > SpamAssassinator does what he can, but between ninja practice, > meditation, and the occasional beheading, he has limited time to help > people who won't first try to help themselves, especially when the > solution to their problems is in floodlit letters, fifty feet tall. > > -- The SpamAssassinator > > PS: The Boetian translation is coming "soon". > </sarcasm> > > -- > Bob Apthorpe > > 2.11: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.20: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.30: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.31: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.41: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.43: > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.44 > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.50: > This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached > along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted > mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.51: > This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached > along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted > mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.53: > This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached > along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted > mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > 2.54: > This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached > along with this report, so you can recognize or block similar unwanted > mail in future. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. > If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a > relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. > Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > Spamassassin-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
