As we’ve commented on before, a fundamental goal and challenge for our company is how to drive RSS adoption by the mainstream internet citizenry. By mainstream I’m referring to those who may not even consciously use RSS yet. (Among other non-niche, non-early adopter markers.)

It may seem alien to those of us out here on the geek edge, but there are a lot more of those folks than there are of us. And on the internet, not only does no one know you’re a dog, they also don’t know if your eyeballs and dollars are geek-driven or not (nor should it matter, to a large degree).

As I talked about in my 47hats guest post, it can be challenging to remember that those building the online apps and products are typically very different from many of those using (or potentially using) them. As I and the other attendees at a usability conference were once informed at the outset: ”We’re tainted”. (As far as remembering and understanding what user experience is like for newcomers).

Frequently, the best people to help new users are not the developers or superusers. The best people to help are those who were most recently new users. They’ve amassed enough skills to develop efficient workflow with the product or app, but they still remember what it was like to be a total n00b.

Seth Godin addresses additional angles of the demographic focus of development in a recent post as well: Should you ignore the n00bs?

”Once you dumb it down so every single person gets it, you bake out the magic and the mystery and the elegance.”

This is a very real concern for us, since at present our core audience remains techies, who largely just need bugs fixed and to be directed to the APIs for mashup purposes. Common Craft’s RSS in Plain English video is excellent, but it’s not for them. (Alas, we approached them too late to commission a “PostRank in Plain English” video.)

If we implemented every feature we’ve been asked for… Well, we couldn’t. Half the requests directly contradict the other half, and you wouldn’t be able to see your feeds in Google Reader or on our site for all the buttons, toggles, and drop-down boxes.

I suspect the balance to be struck lies in a tactic employed by a lot of good software: invisibility. Newcomers to RSS don’t need the 5Cs explained to them. They don’t need to know that PostRank scores aren’t a fundamental function of RSS. (If we have our way, before long they will be…) :)
Help users Read What Matters, save time, and feel like they’re getting everything they need to know out of the time they spend online – but hide how you’re helping in plain site, built into RSS readers and websites and widgets. To get started, they just need to see the basics. Later on they can explore the wonders of “advanced features”.

Inevitably, people will have questions, or won’t understand how something works, or will think our software is intended to something it was never designed to do. What then? Well, Seth comments on that, too:

Why not consider making it easy for the confused to ask for help? And treat them with respect when they do. If you don’t create a little confusion, it’s unlikely you’ve built something remarkable.

What then? Well, that’s what I’m here for. Treating users with respect isn’t hard. At present, many of those asking questions know a whole lot more about development and applications of RSS technologies than I do. I just happen to know more about this technology than they do.

And for those later adopters and future users? Their expertise simply happens to lie elsewhere and it’s entirely possible that one day I’ll be their n00b. (Plus, disrespect leads to flaming, and you’d be hard pressed to convince me that igniting a flame war online has ever solved anything.)

Interestingly, though, I’ve not yet had cause to use Seth’s final point:

And to go one step further: sometimes it’s okay to lose the n00bs. Not in an arrogant way (except for some brands) but in a way that says, “this might just not be for you…”

As a Kathy Sierra devotee, I believe that if someone wants to use our functionality, and if their intent is reasonable (i.e. not trying to get PostRank to calculate their tax return or something), then if that person isn’t getting it, it’s my fault for failing to help the right way. Wrong choice of language, examples, or instructions – something. Everyone’s mind has pathways to illumination; you just have to employ the right keys. I freely admit it’s not always easy, though.

Now, I have told a handful of folks our functionality may not be for them. But they weren’t n00bs – far from it. Internet professionals to a one. They are members of the group that want to function as their own filter. They are pretty good at determining what’s worth reading, and they’re not comfortable with risking missing something they might deem important. Fair enough, I get that. Pimping our technology to everyone, even in the face of an educated lack of interest, isn’t good for one’s credibility.

My time is better spent helping those who’re excited about using our stuff but don’t quite have a handle on it yet. Turning those n00bs into passionate users. After all, who better to help evangelize to the mainstream internet citizenry than… mainstream internet citizenry?