What this effectively says is "We need your data to keep this free". Wonder why that might be? And interesting given how much The Guardian hates Facebook.
Interesting UX dark pattern: When you want to make a message excessively large, in order to block so much of the screen that visitors "sign in to not see this again."pic.twitter.com/aqtBze8YqT
-
-
-
Why do you think it's data and not money? The subscription is _paid_.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
-
-
Their UX dark pattern is my opportunity to “build something people want”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not only that, this seems like a dark pattern that mimics a cookies consent pop up that is prevalent in many sites. You might just click the big button thinking it’s “accept cookies”pic.twitter.com/ziPwKmx2lm
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting UX light pattern: adblock + noscript. I've had the former for a long time but installed the latter a few months ago, and it's made news sites readable again.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Too little value to login + fierce competition with other tabs = I just close such sites despite interest. Also, reminds of ransom.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm reminded of this every time I'm forced to look at something on Facebook.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is it a dark pattern or a necessary pattern?
-
Necessarily dark? If viewers love your content, they will subscribe. Otherwise, just let them go. Don't show and bully/beg them to subscribe.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.