"You will get less leads with the 'enterprise style' contact page. You don't have enough leads right now. You don't have low value self-serve users you want to turn away. Your BDR team is not overflowing with leads you need to turn away. You can make money from having more leads. Less leads will generate less revenue. Here are some potential metrics from the two styles of contact pages. Here is how these metrics tie into revenue."
I think an honest message like this, at least communicated via email to the budget owners would abscond... or at least absolve one of any guilt.
Also, thank you for having the option to toggle the font. I wrote a css rule, but found it later.
I think the last point combined with some real data or case studies would prompt introspection.
Anecdotally I stick to companies with good customer support like glue, even if their product is inferior. It's an absolute wonder to be taken seriously by a company, to have feedback integrated into future products, or just have small issues taken care of without hassle.
You're going to laugh, but this is why I stick with AWS. They've twice helped me with billing issues on my personal account - as in an actual human helping me. They have no idea I manage large (not huge) AWS deployments at my day job. They just demonstrate great customer service to me as a small client.
So they have me as a loyal customer. And advocate, it seems.
>They have no idea I manage large (not huge) AWS deployments
I wonder if that is true? Like, how tenacious are they with knowing customers? If the same IP address was used to login to manage two deployments would customer service see a potential link in their interface?
I'm never quite sure in our supposed data-driven economy how clever companies get with this stuff.
First, if this is private vs corporate, they are probably using a separate laptop, likely with a VPN. Second, doing this kind of shadow profiling is a lot of work with potential legal consequences with little gain, at least for support teams. For fraud detection, that is a completely different thing.
So I think a simpler explanation is more plausible: they are selling AWS at such a premium that they can afford normal human customer service and still make a lot of buck.
On the professional side, they also often let you interact with their experts and architects directly, as part of your support contract. With most other companies, you either have to go through front-office support exclusively, or pay extra for Professional Services.
AWS support is extremely good. I have had the same experience in personal projects and in turn have quadrupled down on our leverage of their support at my work.
Absolutely. I've communicated with product teams at AWS in my day job, which is pretty sweet as I've worked for some large organisations, but I've also been put in contact with product teams in my personal projects when I encountered bugs with the AWS SSO, for example.
It's annoying that they actually solve my problems because it would be so easy to hate them as the 900 lb gorilla.
Actually, the default font is much more pleasant than that used on this site (https://lenowo.org/index.php) which I complained about a few days ago - and that site doesn't have an option to make it more readable as far as I can see...
I don’t think the person you’re replying to is suggesting literally that exact message, but something like it. Adapt to your client and the type of relationship you have with them. You can transmit that same message with a different tone.
You have to judge it client by client though. Some are amenable to and grateful for a flatly stated analysis and recommendation, even if it goes against their ideas. Some will feel belittled and undermined. You need both sorts to pay their invoices and refer their peers, so you pick your battles.
This has always frustrated me. You wouldn't go to a doctor, hear that you need an appendix removed, and feel "belittled and undermined"!
The 'problem' (it's a problem from my pov) is that clients simply think they know better when it comes to digital/computer/online stuff. They're used to browsing the web, so they think they know what a good website is. They know how to write a letter in MS Word, so they think they can write good web copy. Etc.
There’s a site that collects stories about experiences like this. It used to be called Clients From Hell, but got absorbed into a bigger site, called Not Always Right[0]. I suspect some of the stories are apocryphal, but it can be entertaining.
> This has always frustrated me. You wouldn't go to a doctor, hear that you need an appendix removed, and feel "belittled and undermined"!
Many people absolutely do. Hell, look at the number of people who refused to take a safe and effective vaccine during a pandemic!
> The 'problem' (it's a problem from my pov) is that clients simply think they know better when it comes to digital/computer/online stuff.
I must also say there is definitely a reasonable point to challenge your doctor. While they're an expert, they're still human. As a software engineer, I expect my non-expert colleagues to challenge me, and I've come up with better ideas as a result.
As a real-life example, I'm currently trying to get treatment for my Morton's neuroma (foot-nerve issue). The orthopaedic consultant wants to do a neurectomy but I want to investigate alternatives before taking the leap. Why? The alternatives, while they may not work, won't make things appreciable worse, whereas a neurectomy has a 3-6 month recovery if it goes well and can't really be undone if it goes wrong.
A lot of it is internal politics. As a consultant, you see the tip of the iceberg. There may be rational reasons for seemingly irrational decisions that you're not privy to. Your contact's boss wants it done some particular way, so your contact insists on doing it that way. Or your contact has recommended doing it some way internally, and they don't want to be made to look a fool by an outside consultant. Etc.
Wow I love the design of this site. Really hit some right notes for me. If you’re going to talk about reviving the ”old web” on hn, please follow through and reach for the originality level of this. So many thoughtful details.
I also admired this and for a moment thought "I should steal this person's style". Then I quickly realised I am not even close to capable of pulling a design like that off, on so many dimensions.
I guess that's why this person is a professional designer and I'm a person who's never worked on a product with a UI in his career!
As someone that works on this space, with the kind of products that want this kind of contact pages, they forgot to mention that even behind login walls, in some products you only get to create a support ticket if there are enough developers with the right level of certifications and partnership.
Urgh... One of the worst things, when you want to contact someone and they have hidden every means of doing so. It reflects badly on the companies that do this and questions why such pages exist to begin with. I understand why companies hate spam, but when a company hides customer service, that should be a major red flag and reeks of cowardice. Customers can and do have major problems, not just Karen type issues, but being ripped off for hundreds or even thousands. They sometimes hide behind underpaid staff who are students or can barely speak English.
This whole post is coming of a bit naive to me... I highly doubt this client is just an inspirational design meeting away from changing their offering and make a massive investment in customer support. I also don't get why a web-development consultant would feel so responsible for a pretty typical business decision.
> I also don't get why a web-development consultant would feel so responsible for a pretty typical business decision by their client.
Because they are an expert in their field and the client, presumably, isn't? I can't imagine another field—hairdressing, construction, financial advice—where the client would reject the paid expert's viewpoint so readily and firmly.
Its bikeshedding - they can see it so they have an opinion on it. I think it happens in many fields where the output is visual - photography, advertising,.....
There is also a general feeling that websites are primarily about design (rather than development) and that the design is aesthetic (rather than UI).
> I can't imagine another field—hairdressing, construction, financial advice
For financial advice, maybe not as readily, but it definitely happens pretty firmly. Lots of people have lost money taking risks they have been warned about. A lot during booms because of FOMO, and a lot because people do not even take advice in the first place.
The expertise offered here is "how to build a website". If the client is insisting that the dev use a specific javascript library, that would be odd.
The client here is just requesting specific content on their website, similar to someone requesting a granite countertop in their kitchen; that seems fine, even if its not particularly classy or aesthetically pleasing to the contractor.
It's more similar to someone asking for a cardboard countertop - any contractor would be well within their rights to tell them it's a bad idea and would be negligent if they didn't.
Do we know that for a fact? You described them as a "web development consultant", but I couldn't tell for certain what their exact role on this project was. Their services page (https://www.nicchan.me/services/) lists both "Web Application front-ends" and "translate your designs into a scalable system", so I think they offer a range.
Both of those sound like expertise in building a website, and not like expertise in business strategy.
To be clear, I would personally have a similar view to the author here. I'm just surprised that they think their opinion on the strategy side matters so much to their client!
But honestly, they are more likely to NOT be experts in the business of the client. They are experts on tech, their own business and aesthetic.
People come to hairdressers with own ideas about how their hair should look like and reject hairdressers advice. In fact, hairdressers are not even trying to give you advice unless you explicitly ask for it. They sometimes makes mild suggestions and offers, but that is it.
Frankly, financial advisors are more likely to give advice designed to max out their bonuses rather then one good for you. You probably should firmly reject that financial product or flat tire insurance.
I doubt the client is wanting to make a massive investment in customer support, but they're probably also not wanting to be actively hostile to anyone who wants that support. It wouldn't surprise me if the client's older support page was little more than a phone number and/or an email address, and the only reason they moved away from that is because of spam. Maybe they're another step removed from that again, but they're not the 16 steps removed that the Fuck Off page is.
If the client's intent is to provide as little support as possible, that would probably have come up during the conversation where they said they wanted that design, but it seems that they like that design for other reasons (it's a decent way to seem bigger than you actually are, seems more professional maybe?).
There is an underlying point in general, but it seems like the author has got hung up over the words "talk to our sales team" and wants to ditch the whole design and go to something with less function as a result.
If I was hiring them I might well start ignoring them at this point as well - thy are literally proposing only implementing only one of the three methods, and the most simple one at that.
I assume I've determined that customers want ready access to some questions. I assume that I have a physical location customers want to see.
Proposing to ditch these is preposterous. I could see proposing inlining the contract form. I could see using more neutral terms ('get in touch' vs 'contract our sales team').
If you're a web dev who has had past clients not pay up due to going broke/cashflow issues, then you have a bit of vested interest in seeing them succeed (and then pay you properly).
Well good news, these days there's another layer. "Not even GPT4-level LLM" bots that frustrate you into giving up by circling to the FAQs over and over.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a contact page that wasn't like this. I always felt it was basically reasonable. if you can direct someone to an answer without having to waste money/time/compute on providing custom service, then that seems basically reasonable to me. yes it's annoying, but it's not a pattern I've ever felt was particularly dark. I'm perfectly happy with "speaking to a human" being the last port of call to fix a problem. as long as it is available somewhere
I do get it when companies who serve billions of people cannot do support like companies who support hundreds. But it should be possible to actually contact some human when you, as a customer, have proven that you have exhausted all other options.
As much as i did not like Broadcom purchasing Vmware and made everything a lot more expensive and annoying, i have to acknowledge that their chat support is pretty good, once you have exhausted all other options.
Great post! And I must admit that this must be the best website I've encountered in ages. The mix of oldschool OS with the pixelated font.. Perfect!
Communicating process is a top-notch hint. Getting everyone involved in meetings to the have the same context and expectations about the common goals is never easy.
Yeah! It's unique, has a personal charm and also everything seems to fit together nicely. Fun to discover such pages, reminds me of the old days, haha!
I agree with the author in that there are such things as "fuck off" contact pages; I deal with them often looking for hardware and software and professional services. The gating of contact behind a sales department is one method of "fucking off" a person, but so is omitting necessary contact information, gating it behind some absolutely hostile AI chat agent, or just burying the page entirely. Certain large American ISPs are very guilty of this behavior, even going so far as to make the entire process of contacting them one giant, deliberately engineered "fuck off and die" experience across literally every medium of contact (web, mail, phone call, etc.).
Though to be fair, this is a bit rich coming from a blog that I'd describe as a "fuck off blog". This was incredibly difficult to read. I'm all for people doing whatever they want with their site (I'm guilty of doing ornery things on my site because I enjoy it and the aesthetic), but I find the irony palpable.
Regarding the communicative iterations where you desperately (read: hopelessly) try to convince a client otherwise as they demand something unreasonable; 100% on-point. In my consultations with a close friend I've found that it's not only hard, but interpersonally challenging to say "no" to someone when you're either being compensated by them or in some personal relationship with them that you don't want to jeopardize. The best advice I've recieved regarding business operations is "don't do business with friends", and I imagine this kind of situation is one of the biiggest reasons why. Someone being set on a terrible idea and relying on you to implement it is not pleasant. My experience with this to date has been informal, but I'd imagine that once legal contracts are involved it becomes hair loss-tier stressful to deal with.
The rise of AI has a lot to do with how these pages keep inventing new ways to avoid offering real support. And along with it comes their close cousin: the “go-away” chat agent—full of useless answers and designed specifically to prevent you from reaching an actual human.
The other techniques are keeping you hanging on a telephone for a long period (I have had to deal with this recently) and then cutting you off, or employing staff who cannot understand English very well.
All means of deflecting genuine complaints away and burying them. They also aim to deflect anger off the structure onto underpaid customer service drones.
The most impressive "fuck off contact page" I've seen was from Trade Republic, an investment app. The support page has a QR code to the in-app FAQ and nothing else.
Turns out that a handful of FAQ answers have a chat widget (with a chatbot, of course) that can be coaxed into switching out to a human. But if your topic is not on the FAQ, the answer doesn't have a chat widget, or you don't randomly click around other topics, you'll never find a contact form.
Even the "complaints" email address found in their legally-mandated Impressum just auto-replies with instructions to use the app help. I've since closed my account, but I'm still amazed how a company holding people's money can shield itself so completely from customers.
I often find myself in the bizarre situation of backing out of a suppliers website to google their contact number. A bit like when you want pricing on something without falling into a sales funnel.
That with its pixel art is styled so beautifully and so hard to read at the same time. Couldn't read it at all. (It's not an eye vision problem, reading pixel fonts just is quite taxing on the brain).
I found it hard too. Perhaps the difference with the other people responding is the size the font is rendered. On my screen, the distance between the top of a "d" and the bottom of a "y" in the body text is 7mm. That corresponds to font size 18 in Word, or 22px in the browser, so basically a chapter heading.
Meanwhile on the other side of the world - I noticed in SEA businesses are more like "just contact us" with a phone number directly available / facebook page. Like, they don't want you to do anything with the website, they expect you to chat with them directly.
I hate generic name-text-submit-forms as the only method of contact. Somehow the article makes them the definition of not a "f** off contact page" - why?
I think such forms are a direct downgrade from providing an email address.
- Responding to the submissions likely requires email anyway
- Impersonation/spam is even less difficult
- Sender isn't guaranteed to get a record of sending the message
- A faceless form with unknown machinery feels like sending messages in a bottle
My countries groupon had a fuck off page. It had a phone number but it wasnt connected. It had a bot (need I say more). As a hail mary I sent them an email. They got back in 10 minutes and fixed the issue. Like wtf? that was a suprising bonus. But an awful experience to get there.
If you want to design a proper fuck off contact page, one valuable thing is: put as many mandatory fields as you can into the contact form!
Full name, contact e-mail, your corporate rank, company name, company phone number, what kind of product are you making, have you fucked off yet, no, then the address of your company's legal office, the name of your pet and how many millions is your company willing to spend with us. That's the bare minimum!
The contact page on the left is something I absolutely hate. If the prefer method of contact is email, just give me an email.
If they need to enter that into some ticketing system, give me access to the ticketing system. The page on right give me some ideas how they handle things internally.
The form on left is almost certainly a webform-to-email, this is ridiculous.
looking at font choice, how ironic they are complaining about UX
Don't be so inconsiderate. Humans increase costs. The silicon valley oligarchs do not have enough. They need to reduce costs. Replace everyone possible with "AI". They are on the race to the first trillion after all.
Good luck trying to reach a human for support on google, one of the most rich companies in history, that permeates virtually every aspect of life.
I think an honest message like this, at least communicated via email to the budget owners would abscond... or at least absolve one of any guilt.
Also, thank you for having the option to toggle the font. I wrote a css rule, but found it later.
Anecdotally I stick to companies with good customer support like glue, even if their product is inferior. It's an absolute wonder to be taken seriously by a company, to have feedback integrated into future products, or just have small issues taken care of without hassle.
So they have me as a loyal customer. And advocate, it seems.
I wonder if that is true? Like, how tenacious are they with knowing customers? If the same IP address was used to login to manage two deployments would customer service see a potential link in their interface?
I'm never quite sure in our supposed data-driven economy how clever companies get with this stuff.
So I think a simpler explanation is more plausible: they are selling AWS at such a premium that they can afford normal human customer service and still make a lot of buck.
It's annoying that they actually solve my problems because it would be so easy to hate them as the 900 lb gorilla.
(Very few sites have this feature, so the one in question gets big bonus points from me)
This has always frustrated me. You wouldn't go to a doctor, hear that you need an appendix removed, and feel "belittled and undermined"!
The 'problem' (it's a problem from my pov) is that clients simply think they know better when it comes to digital/computer/online stuff. They're used to browsing the web, so they think they know what a good website is. They know how to write a letter in MS Word, so they think they can write good web copy. Etc.
[0] https://notalwaysright.com/
Many people absolutely do. Hell, look at the number of people who refused to take a safe and effective vaccine during a pandemic!
> The 'problem' (it's a problem from my pov) is that clients simply think they know better when it comes to digital/computer/online stuff.
I must also say there is definitely a reasonable point to challenge your doctor. While they're an expert, they're still human. As a software engineer, I expect my non-expert colleagues to challenge me, and I've come up with better ideas as a result.
As a real-life example, I'm currently trying to get treatment for my Morton's neuroma (foot-nerve issue). The orthopaedic consultant wants to do a neurectomy but I want to investigate alternatives before taking the leap. Why? The alternatives, while they may not work, won't make things appreciable worse, whereas a neurectomy has a 3-6 month recovery if it goes well and can't really be undone if it goes wrong.
I guess that's why this person is a professional designer and I'm a person who's never worked on a product with a UI in his career!
https://www.nicchan.me/art/
Because they are an expert in their field and the client, presumably, isn't? I can't imagine another field—hairdressing, construction, financial advice—where the client would reject the paid expert's viewpoint so readily and firmly.
There is also a general feeling that websites are primarily about design (rather than development) and that the design is aesthetic (rather than UI).
> I can't imagine another field—hairdressing, construction, financial advice
For financial advice, maybe not as readily, but it definitely happens pretty firmly. Lots of people have lost money taking risks they have been warned about. A lot during booms because of FOMO, and a lot because people do not even take advice in the first place.
The client here is just requesting specific content on their website, similar to someone requesting a granite countertop in their kitchen; that seems fine, even if its not particularly classy or aesthetically pleasing to the contractor.
To be fair telling customers to f** off when they want to reach out for help scales infinitely
To be clear, I would personally have a similar view to the author here. I'm just surprised that they think their opinion on the strategy side matters so much to their client!
People come to hairdressers with own ideas about how their hair should look like and reject hairdressers advice. In fact, hairdressers are not even trying to give you advice unless you explicitly ask for it. They sometimes makes mild suggestions and offers, but that is it.
Frankly, financial advisors are more likely to give advice designed to max out their bonuses rather then one good for you. You probably should firmly reject that financial product or flat tire insurance.
If the client's intent is to provide as little support as possible, that would probably have come up during the conversation where they said they wanted that design, but it seems that they like that design for other reasons (it's a decent way to seem bigger than you actually are, seems more professional maybe?).
If I was hiring them I might well start ignoring them at this point as well - thy are literally proposing only implementing only one of the three methods, and the most simple one at that.
I assume I've determined that customers want ready access to some questions. I assume that I have a physical location customers want to see.
Proposing to ditch these is preposterous. I could see proposing inlining the contract form. I could see using more neutral terms ('get in touch' vs 'contract our sales team').
I do get it when companies who serve billions of people cannot do support like companies who support hundreds. But it should be possible to actually contact some human when you, as a customer, have proven that you have exhausted all other options.
As much as i did not like Broadcom purchasing Vmware and made everything a lot more expensive and annoying, i have to acknowledge that their chat support is pretty good, once you have exhausted all other options.
Click the “Contact” link at the bottom of this HN page. It’s a mailto link.
Reeder has a simple contact form on the page.
https://reederapp.com/classic/
Overcast list an email and social media to contact.
https://overcast.fm/contact
Alfred points to the forum and lists email addresses to contact.
https://www.alfredapp.com/help/contact/
iA Writer lists emails
https://ia.net/about-us
SnippetsLab lists emails
https://www.renfei.org/snippets-lab/manual/mac/share-your-fe...
Those are just a few off the top of my head. Indie developers tend to be more respectful of their customers.
> I'm perfectly happy with "speaking to a human" being the last port of call to fix a problem. as long as it is available somewhere
Yet, too often, it simply isn’t.
Conversely, Virgin Media's is well into the "f** off" realm: https://www.virginmedia.com/support/help/contact-us
Hostile customer service is a sign that a company is too comfortable and there is insufficient competition in the marketplace.
Communicating process is a top-notch hint. Getting everyone involved in meetings to the have the same context and expectations about the common goals is never easy.
Though to be fair, this is a bit rich coming from a blog that I'd describe as a "fuck off blog". This was incredibly difficult to read. I'm all for people doing whatever they want with their site (I'm guilty of doing ornery things on my site because I enjoy it and the aesthetic), but I find the irony palpable.
Regarding the communicative iterations where you desperately (read: hopelessly) try to convince a client otherwise as they demand something unreasonable; 100% on-point. In my consultations with a close friend I've found that it's not only hard, but interpersonally challenging to say "no" to someone when you're either being compensated by them or in some personal relationship with them that you don't want to jeopardize. The best advice I've recieved regarding business operations is "don't do business with friends", and I imagine this kind of situation is one of the biiggest reasons why. Someone being set on a terrible idea and relying on you to implement it is not pleasant. My experience with this to date has been informal, but I'd imagine that once legal contracts are involved it becomes hair loss-tier stressful to deal with.
All means of deflecting genuine complaints away and burying them. They also aim to deflect anger off the structure onto underpaid customer service drones.
Turns out that a handful of FAQ answers have a chat widget (with a chatbot, of course) that can be coaxed into switching out to a human. But if your topic is not on the FAQ, the answer doesn't have a chat widget, or you don't randomly click around other topics, you'll never find a contact form.
Even the "complaints" email address found in their legally-mandated Impressum just auto-replies with instructions to use the app help. I've since closed my account, but I'm still amazed how a company holding people's money can shield itself so completely from customers.
Then I went on HN to read the comments, and found out there is a toggle to get an anti-aliased font…
I think such forms are a direct downgrade from providing an email address.
- Responding to the submissions likely requires email anyway
- Impersonation/spam is even less difficult
- Sender isn't guaranteed to get a record of sending the message
- A faceless form with unknown machinery feels like sending messages in a bottle
Full name, contact e-mail, your corporate rank, company name, company phone number, what kind of product are you making, have you fucked off yet, no, then the address of your company's legal office, the name of your pet and how many millions is your company willing to spend with us. That's the bare minimum!
The form on left is almost certainly a webform-to-email, this is ridiculous.
looking at font choice, how ironic they are complaining about UX
(including you, Google).
Good luck trying to reach a human for support on google, one of the most rich companies in history, that permeates virtually every aspect of life.