Participant: Log in to see names
|
Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 12:38 PM
I was sure there was a discussion about this but I can't find one. I have long held that many classmates do not read any further than "Profile Visibility: Allow..." and then proceed to immediately UNcheck the box -- resulting in exactly the opposite of the desired action. I feel it would be more clear to begin with "Profile Visibility: Block the public and search engines from accessing [my] Profile and allow only fellow Alums and Teachers to view my Profile details. Leave this box unchecked if you wish to allow the public (friends, co-workers, family members, etc.) to view your Profile details." Can this wording be flipped thusly? Thanks! Terry
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 1:50 PM - Response #1
I agree, the selection title is very confusing. If one has to read something 2x and then once more, something is not right. I suggest the option be labelled "Block Profile" which matches the "block" wording the descriptive area. The explanation then would be like you described "Block the public and search engines ..."
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 4:37 PM - Response #2
Even better, Jack. So, the final suggested wording is: "Block Profile Visibility: Block the public and search engines from accessing [my] Profile and allow only fellow Alums and Teachers to view my Profile details. Leave this box unchecked if you [also] wish to allow the public (friends, co-workers, family members, etc.) to view your Profile details."
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM - Response #3
I'm certainly good with that. Anyone else wanna weigh in? Thanks Teresa and Jack.
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 11:49 AM - Response #4
It makes more sense. I like it. 
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 12:04 PM - Response #5
I agree wholeheartedly with jack and Terry! When you get my classmates' (and my) age, wording is critical for proper understanding! Steve
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 12:06 PM - Response #6
I like that wording too..I would go with it!!
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM - Response #7
Excellent suggestion!
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 12:59 PM - Response #8
Thank you, Brad!  Cheers, all! Terry
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM - Response #9
Great
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM - Response #10
How many votes do you need? Yes, make it more intuitive & default it using "Block..."
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 3:09 PM - Response #11
Agreed, excellent suggestion! Thank you Terry! Not sure if the check box is checked by DEFAULT, but would suggest that as the DEFAULT (to assist all admins in maintaining the utmost security). And might add in the comments, "The Default IS with checkmark in the box for your privacy to BLOCK your profile from the world wide web search engines, etc." (something like that)
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 3:16 PM - Response #12
I agree. Terry, you are absolutely right about how much others read. Remember 'speed reading'? I think we have a disease now called skim-reading. I try to use bold and or bullets whenever possible. The descriptions are not that long, yet we learn how few read them. 
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 6:30 PM - Response #13
Wording has been updated. Thanks again for this everyone.
|
|
Participant: Log in to see names
|
Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 7:13 PM - Response #14
Look how quickly that was updated. Thanks! 
|
|