Comments on: play nice & make friends with human language

By: Friday Link Round Up « ellie <3 libraries

Friday Link Round Up « ellie <3 libraries — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:26:08 +0000

[...] play nice & make friends with human language [...]

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:31:58 +0000

Yes, Deborah, thanks! I totally agree that the little things are super important and add up quickly.

By: Deborah

Deborah — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:57:21 +0000

This is a great post, and I don’t think you’re being too picky. The tone of your revised Multnomah page is far friendlier than their actual page. I think the sum of these small details affects people’s overall experience in a library — or anywhere.

By: Larry Roth

Larry Roth — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:04:11 +0000

Cool post. I think the issue you bring up–the casual-ness of the language–is an interesting one. We have been imbuing more and more corporate sites with more casual language, and I have observed that the results are a perceived willingness by users to read instructions and follow prompts.

By: nate

nate — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:16:47 +0000

@aaron it’d be interesting to do it w/ different user groups though… teens… kids… seniors… and then have separate language for each user group after they’ve signed into their library account…

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:01:52 +0000

@Nate –
i’d say that language from public libraries should be friendly, human, fun and understandable without being over the top (unless it makes sense to do so).

the easiest and best way to answer this question, though, would be through some super easy to do user testing, right? have two or three options and see what people respond to most, and what they say they prefer.

By: nate

nate — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:59:24 +0000

Continued thought
I don’t think its always a good idea to use casual language in serious transactions.
That is what I was getting at w/ the bank thing.
Is the library an institution that engages in serious transactions, or a casual exchange of information?
Both.
So, in an OPAC situation it might be nice to say something firendly, relaxed, chill…
But what about collecting fines? What if you get a prompt that says “hey, it’d be awfully nice if you were to throw us some cash for those books you’ve had forever”. Not so good.
When should we display which personality?
How do we determine how out users want to be addressed?

By: nate

nate — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:47:48 +0000

@Aaron agreed. it definitely says something about the nature of the users that tweetie (and twitter itself) are engaging that the developers would choose “ooo that sounds fun” for “yes”. makes sense for that situation, despite the growing ’seriousification’ of twitter. i wonder how people react to a serious tone in a twitter client vs. a casual, playful tone? more importantly for this forum- what do you think a public library’s tone should be with its users?

By: caleb

caleb — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:01:58 +0000

Since you opted into sharing your transcript, I reviewed and shared it.

http://www.oregonlibraries.net/archive/145611

Manual approval is no good, but it has allowed us to explore the value of this idea.

By: Alison

Alison — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:19:25 +0000

I heartily agree. Thanks for making this point!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:16:48 +0000

@nate –

yeah, finding a balance between cutesy language and more friendly, human language is not always easy, especially since different people have different tolerances.

By: nate

nate — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:24:18 +0000

re: cutesy language in interfaces, well, i hate it. it drives me nuts that my bank ATM gives me options like “sure”. its not like “sure” i want my money, its like “YES”, give me my money. now.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:02:23 +0000

I appreciate this post. You are fair and balanced with Multnomah – and wouldn’t it be wonderful to see more little bits of human connection in the language of all of our library interfaces.