[bisq-network/bisq] Bisq-2 UX challenges (Discussion #5959)

[andyDoucette]

I feel like this is way too complex.  It will take a ton of time to code and also 98% of the people will just use the defaults and be too scared to change them.  Plus, if we ask the user to make so many decisions/climb a big learning curve we'll just lose users.  Can we do our research to see what small combination of these will hit 90% of of the mass-market use-cases with minimal risk and drop the rest?  The pareto principle has been validated in my life time and time again.  By not doing the research in the name of "future flexibility", we're really just pushing work on thousands of users that we should be doing ourselves.  We should map out the best path or three through all of these parameters and just implement that - if we absolutely need to, we could have a setting that says "risk aversion level" that says "low, medium, or high", and that could motivate up to 3 possible combinations of all of the above parameters (right now there are 2764800 combinations).

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/discussions/5959#discussioncomment-2153733
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <bisq-network/bisq/repo-discussions/5959/comments/2153733 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20220210/44cf2088/attachment.htm>