One of the biggest obstacles for decentralization is the amount of time we waste clicking around the nns. Just a few small changes would make a big difference and make it less of a chore to vote for governance.
We literally vote for the same thing every other day there is no reason for force us to read it over and over again.
We should have the vote buttons exposed at the front and they should be async. Why do I need to wait for the nns to answer, I should be able to keep going through proposals.
Similarly if we do want to read the description there should be a read summary button that has a small popup with summary. Then the submit button should be async and I should be able to keep reading proposals while the transaction is happening.
The modal aside, which would be an improvement on desktop, I think this idea just shows that many people have no interest or the necessary skills to understand the content of most proposals. The only type of proposal that should be pushed through without considering the content should be spam, and out long-term assumption should be that there’s a good solution proposed for spam.
To me, this suggestion just re-enforces my view that 99% of people should delegate to more informed voters, and those informed voters should be forced to read every proposal’s content. Perhaps the tediousness of having to open each proposal encourages more delegation to “expert” neurons?
I agree with your suggestion. @peterparker has commented on this previously and there is a technical reason why we have to wait. Perhaps they are getting close to resolving this issue.
I’m not sure either of these are the broader goal. It is certainly not to get people to stake. It is to get people to participate in governance and provide relatively easy mechanisms to accomplish that task. Everyone who creates and funds a neuron should be doing it because they voluntarily want to participate in governance.
Thanks @wbp. Correct there is a reason but we would like to try to improve the UX. We did not begin to work on improving this but there is an internal task in status “To do”. So I can confirm that we will have a look.
Worth to note: this week we proposed two improvements for the proposal that are now live. PR 1133 and 1129. This last one is particularly useful because now users can vote for proposal even if these are already accepted or declined - i.e. can vote and get rewarded as long as the proposal duration is open.
That is how I thought it worked all along, but we only recently experienced execution of a proposal by Absolute Majority with only 50+% total voting power where it mattered. This just another great example why the NNS needs to be mutable. It’s never going to be perfect…there will always need to be improvements. Thank you for recognizing this issue and implementing a resolution so quickly.
Not that I known but it’s also something I would like to have. There are no such communication channels with the chain as web socket or other solution that would push data from the backend so we we would have to poll on the frontend side. If I remember correctly we also discussed once some UI idea “refresh action”. I’ll share the feedback in our next week weekly meeting, thanks for the input.
We have communicated several times about the UI, our vision for its future (e.g. post and post) and plan to continue to do so. Constructive feedback to make the upcoming new UI shinier and user friendly are most welcomed.
Is that really the vision for the UI? I thought it was some transitional update with the sns. I’m not a ui/ux expert but I have worked on web development for most of my career. We need layout/flow changes to the app. Right now it’s confusing and hostile. That’s the feedback from everyone that sees it. Is it designed for power users only?
To be fair, the user stories are not that trivial neither but I see your point. Anyhow as I said, we shared some first posts and we will continue to do so to exchange information and ideas. Looking forward to the inputs.