pull down to refresh

164 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 12h \ on: Why people leave nostr (and SN?) nostr
There are a lot of keynesian-like grand theories to say about complicated situations like this. (njump is down for me so I couldn't load it to read but I'm guessing this overshoots what's wrong.)
The correct answer is probably simple, vague, and unsatisfying: high costs and low value - perceived or real.
For us at least, our UX is bad (ie costs are high). We've focused on making non-custodial work well and neglected UX, because it's hard to make things that don't work well easy to use, and now need to leverage the things that work well and make it easy to use again.
write
preview
42 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 10h
What aspects of UX do you think are bad? Not trying to flatter or anything, but I think the UX is pretty good. Very easy to use both on desktop and mobile.
Wallet stuff, of course, is complex. But I attribute that less to SN than the underlying tech.
reply
137 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 9h
What both SN and nostr have are churn. All products have it. You grow by adding more people than you have churn.
We churn very lowly and slowly, but we are not adding more people than we churn which I attribute to:
  1. the sign up is hidden
  2. after sign up, no free posts/comments (you get a free bio but you have to guess that it will be worth doing), so you need sats on lightning to even use SN
  3. to get full value you need to attach a wallet which is at least a 10 step process - even for someone familiar with lightning ... for someone unfamiliar with lightning they will probably give up
SN is just too hard to start using - time to value is too hard/long. If we want to grow, we need to be able to get someone who is merely bitcoin curious and weakly motivated from 1 through 3 as fast as possible with as little effort as possible.
reply
107 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 7h
Ah, got it. I was thinking of UI, but you're right, the UX, especially for new users, could be a lot better.
reply
16 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 11h
The part of this I found interesting was that there are likely far more people who think they want open intelligent dialogue than those who actually enjoy it.
Most find it unappealing and choose to go back to the comfort of just having their priors confirmed.
It's not a grand theory (I don't think), but rather someone's observations from years of watching who has stayed and who has left.
reply