Maximizing Communication, not Traffic

post by jefftk (jkaufman) · 2025-01-05T13:00:02.280Z · LW · GW · 7 comments

Contents

7 comments

As someone who writes for fun, I don't need to get people onto my site:

It would be different if I funded my writing through ads (maximize time on site to maximize impressions) or subscriptions (get the chance to pitch, probably want to tease a paywall).

Sometimes I notice myself accidentally copying what makes sense for other writers. For example, because I can't put full-length posts on Bluesky or Mastodon I write short intros and link my full post. Yesterday I initially drafted:

It's common to flavor truffles with extracts, but I'd like less of a liquor flavor. This time last year I made some with freeze-dried raspberries, which I think came out well. I continue to like those a lot, and this year tried strawberry and orange zest. One worked a lot better than the other: [link]

This would have gotten more people to click through, but that shouldn't be my target. Instead I posted:

... and this year tried strawberry (eh) and orange zest (great!) [link]

No need to hold curiosity hostage.

It's common to criticize "clickbait", where a teaser entices and then doesn't deliver, but even reserving key information for the full article is a product of authors (needing to!) optimize for goals other than communicating to users. I like that this isn't a pressure that I'm under. Because our culture has so many who are under it, however, optimizing for communication can require noticing and intentionally avoiding common patterns.

7 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by avancil · 2025-01-05T19:05:45.970Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

There is a related problem where many browser-based productivity tools follow design principles from websites that are trying to get clicks. For example, I commonly run into DB interfaces at work that will return, say, 10 (or 25, or other small number) results per page. Now, it's good design to not let a query that returns, say, a million results, crash the browser. But, if a few hundred, or even a few thousand, results will display within milliseconds, why make me page dozens (or hundreds) of times? (I'm looking at you, GitHub commit history!)

Another example would be Microsoft Office's long history of making design choices that optimize increasing "engagement with the tool" rather than making the tool unobtrusively facilitate the task. They got rid of Clippy, but now they're into obnoxious pop-ups that are designed to call attention to some new gadget or feature.

The "click" economy has had pervasive effects on the software industry.

Replies from: taymon-beal
comment by Taymon Beal (taymon-beal) · 2025-01-05T22:23:46.724Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

You don't think the GitHub thing is about reducing server load? That would be my guess.

Replies from: lcmgcd
comment by lemonhope (lcmgcd) · 2025-01-06T01:33:01.442Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

No that should be one of the fastest and most cachable queries

comment by lemonhope (lcmgcd) · 2025-01-06T01:52:59.928Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Easy to say when you're already known by almost everyone in your world, have total career security, and have a full-sized family! I've never really done teaser links, but I can see why anyone would. You're more likely to gain some reputation or a job or a spouse if the reader goes to your website and sees your name there at the top.

Also, in terms of value to the reader: my life has changed in a big way because of a blog post I read two times that I can think of, but never from Twitter, despite spending more time reading Twitter than blogs by now. When I see something important on Twitter, I usually bookmark it and forget about it; when I see something important in a blog post, I often act. This is my own fault, but I suspect it's a common experience. Infinite scroll certainly doesn't help.

Replies from: jkaufman
comment by jefftk (jkaufman) · 2025-01-06T21:21:23.540Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

You're more likely to gain some reputation or a job or a spouse if the reader goes to your website and sees your name there at the top.

Right! I agree there are advantages to getting people onto your site beyond the opportunity to show them ads or convince them to buy a subscription. The post, though, is about the consequences of being in the fortunate position of not needing to do this.

comment by lsusr · 2025-01-06T05:48:46.222Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I like that [clickbait] isn't a pressure that I'm under.

I have never clicked on a post by jefftk and then been disappointed that it was clickbait.

comment by Declan Molony (declan-molony) · 2025-01-05T19:23:37.498Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

As someone who also likes to write for fun, I've noticed that the quality of my writing is impacted (and is probably degraded) by the pressure to perform. Writing on LessWrong is fun and my personal standards encourage me to create the best post I can make. Writing college papers was stressful because I was no longer writing for myself, but for a grade and to impress my professor.

To an extent you're touching on extrinsic vs intrinsic motivation

The same is true for other hobbies like playing piano. Growing up doing competitions was stressful, but writing music today as an adult is fun.

Ultimately it's about authenticity.

  • The extrinsically motivated person is obligated to create a product.
  • The intrinsically motivated person gets to create art.