[IxDA Discuss] TechCrunch defends the life of the "user"

[Katie Albers]

I generally like to call them "customers" -- just so
that folks remember that's where the money comes from.


Also, in the design and development areas, I've dealt
with way too many groups where they still think of the
stakeholders as the users, and I find that talking
about the customers cuts through that confusion.

Of course, I'm not sure how that would perform in a
search...

Katie

--- Mark Schraad <mschraad at mac.com> wrote:

> 'User' is a perfectly acceptable term in the back
> halls of design and development - and it is totally
> appropriate for application development.  But it is
> not a particularly user friendly term when
> addressing the user directly. We have a current
> debate (current only because I won't let it go) in
> determing language for link to the ratings and
> reviews section of a portal. I was over-ruled and
> the link is labeled 'user reviews' as opposed to
> 'owner reviews'. The deciding vote was that 'user'
> ranked higher in search.
> 
> I like calling them consumers when appropriate - but
> that is mostly in conversations with the business
> execs and advertisers. I believe that consumers
> allows for a bit more compassion from those not
> invested. But you are right Dave, odd that TC is
> discussing it, and sort of a hair splitting
> exercise.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On Friday, July 27, 2007, at 03:06PM, "David Malouf"
> <dave.ixd at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/07/27/long-live-the-user/
> >
> >In a recent post the folks at TechCrunch talk about
> how many want to
> >kill off the "user", or at least the word
> describing it.
> >
> >one person says that people are users if they use a
> Dishwasher, then
> >why a computer. Thomas Vander Wal says that the
> term is
> >degrading/dehumanizing.
> >
> >The author Duncan Riley, likes the term and proudly
> identifies.
> >
> >I'm not interested in a semantic debate here at
> all.
> >I just find it interesting that a start-up Web 2.0
> focused profit-blog
> >which really never talks about these types of
> issues, feels the need
> >to talk about this.
> >
> >is there some great relevance I'm missing? I mean
> Thomas, are we
> >really THAT stupid that we can't tell that the
> people we call users
> >are users? Is it any worse than the term subject,
> participant,
> >patient, etc. that people use to distance
> themselves from our fellow
> >human beings?
> >
> >I have seen the trend to say "human experience
> design" attempted by a
> >few, but I really don't think all that differently
> about it when I
> >hear that vs. user experience.
> >
> >anyway, barely interesting.
> >
> >-- dave
>
________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association
> (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............
> http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help ..................
> http://beta.ixda.org/help
> Unsubscribe ................
> http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> Questions .................. list at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org
> 
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Choose the right car based on your needs.  Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool.
http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/