What is the problem you are seeing? Please describe.
Users are disappointed about the quality of the Blockstack apps they find in app.co and elsewhere. This should be no surprise: The listed apps vary in quality and there are no ways to reliably determine app quality in advance of trying out an app.
Even when Blockstack showcases apps to the public, selected apps are presented as valid contenders to commercial apps that have had years in development and millions in funding.
Issue #224 recommends stopping using mining rank when recommending apps, but while a step in the right direction, is insufficient to avoid disappointed users.
How is this problem misaligned with goals of app mining?
Reality distortion and insufficient information about app quality will not accelerate the adoption of high quality apps that preserve individual’s fundamental digital rights because users will leave disappointed.
What is the explicit recommendation you’re looking to propose?
To better set user expectations, listings of Blockstack apps should indicate the maturity level of apps, so the users can know in advance whether they e.g. can expect a simple prototype, a production level app, or something in between.
As a start, developers can be invited to solicit the maturity level of their apps, for use by app.co and elsewhere, applying maturity status labels such as idea, demo, beta, release.
Users can be invited to join in the journey towards decentralized alternatives, with ways to provide feedback or join as beta tester integrated in the app listing experience.
Describe your long term considerations in proposing this change. Please include the ways you can predict this recommendation could go wrong and possible ways mitigate.
Providing information about the status of apps will set the expectations right without dependence on the ranking of the apps. This liberates us from having to make the ranking algorithm rank the quality of the apps in a way that matches user's expectations.
What is the problem you are seeing? Please describe.
Users are disappointed about the quality of the Blockstack apps they find in app.co and elsewhere. This should be no surprise: The listed apps vary in quality and there are no ways to reliably determine app quality in advance of trying out an app.
Even when Blockstack showcases apps to the public, selected apps are presented as valid contenders to commercial apps that have had years in development and millions in funding.
Issue #224 recommends stopping using mining rank when recommending apps, but while a step in the right direction, is insufficient to avoid disappointed users.
How is this problem misaligned with goals of app mining?
Reality distortion and insufficient information about app quality will not accelerate the adoption of high quality apps that preserve individual’s fundamental digital rights because users will leave disappointed.
What is the explicit recommendation you’re looking to propose?
To better set user expectations, listings of Blockstack apps should indicate the maturity level of apps, so the users can know in advance whether they e.g. can expect a simple prototype, a production level app, or something in between.
As a start, developers can be invited to solicit the maturity level of their apps, for use by app.co and elsewhere, applying maturity status labels such as
idea,demo,beta,release.Users can be invited to join in the journey towards decentralized alternatives, with ways to provide feedback or join as beta tester integrated in the app listing experience.
Describe your long term considerations in proposing this change. Please include the ways you can predict this recommendation could go wrong and possible ways mitigate.
Providing information about the status of apps will set the expectations right without dependence on the ranking of the apps. This liberates us from having to make the ranking algorithm rank the quality of the apps in a way that matches user's expectations.
Additional context
224 Stop using mining rank when recommending apps
195 Require miners to provide a contact section