Amanda Briggs :: Blog

User tests

Describing Web 2.0 as the "latest fashion", Mr Nielsen said many sites paying attention to it were neglecting some of the principles of good design and usability established over the last decade.

Good practices include making a site easy to use, good search tools, the use of text free of jargon, usability testing and a consideration of design even before the first line of code is written.

Sadly, said Mr Nielsen, the rush to embrace Web 2.0 technology meant that many firms were turning their back on the basics.

"They should get the basics right first," he said. "Sadly most websites do not have those primary things right."

There was a risk, he said, of a return to the dotcom boom days when many sites, such as Boo.com, looked great but were terrible to use.

"That was just bad," he said. "The idea of community, user generated content and more dynamic web pages are not inherently bad in the same way, they should be secondary to the primary things sites should get right."

"The main criticism or problem is that I do not think these things are as useful as the primary things," he said.

Well-established patterns of user involvement with sites also led Mr Nielsen to question the sense of adopting Web 2.0 technologies.

Research suggests that users of a site split into three groups. One that regularly contributes (about 1%); a second that occasionally contributes (about 9%); and a majority who almost never contribute (90%).

By definition, said Mr Nielsen, only a small number of users are likely to make significant use of all the tools a site provides.

While some sites with particular demographics, such as MySpace, Facebook and Bebo, have large involved communities of users that will not hold true for all sites, he said.

"Most people just want to get in, get it and get out," said Mr Nielsen. "For them the web is not a goal in itself. It is a tool."

Web firms rushing to serve the small, committed minority might find they make a site far less useful to the vast majority who come to a site for a specific purpose.

Mr Nielsen also questioned championing teenage use of the web as a harbinger of what people will continue to do when they were older.

Although people in their late 30s make very different use of the web to those in their teens, Mr Nielsen expects that when those teenagers grow up the time they spend online will diminish.

"It's because they are 20 years old that they act differently to 40-year-olds," said Mr Nielsen.

Blogs which are open and uncensored should post an "anything goes" logo to the site to warn readers, the code suggests.

Readers of these blogs would be warned: "We are not responsible for the comments of any poster, and when discussions get heated, crude language, insults and other "off colour" comments may be encountered. Participate in this site at your own risk."

The draft will now be assessed and amended by bloggers around the world.

The code states: "We are committed to the 'Civility Enforced' standard: we will not post unacceptable content, and we'll delete comments that contain it."

The draft defines unacceptable content as anything included or linked to that is being used to "abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others".

It also refers to libellous material, infringement of copyright or trademark and violations of privacy.

Prominent blogger Kathy Sierra called on the blogosphere to combat the culture of abuse online after a series of death threats forced her to cancel a public appearance and suspend her blog.

Ms Sierra described on her blog how she had been subject to a campaign of threats, including a post that featured a picture of her next to a noose.

At the heart of the issue is the degree of freedom afforded to people who want to comment on blog posts.

"If those published comments could be construed as a threat, and the perpetrator doesn't withdraw them and apologise, we will cooperate with law enforcement to protect the target of the threat," the code states.

The code has had mixed support among bloggers.

Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, told BBC Radio 5 Live's Pods and Blogs programme: "The question is: Do we allow people to use our blogs as places to embark on threatening behaviour and really abusive personal insults?

"You don't have to insult people to be frank."

But the code was not welcome by blogger and commentator Jeff Jarvis, who called it "misguided".

On his blog, he wrote: "This effort misses the point of the internet, blogs, and even of civilized behavior. They treat the blogosphere as if it were a school library where someone... can maintain order and control. They treat it as a medium for media.

"It's a place. And when I moved into the place that is my town, I didn't put up a badge on my fence saying that I'd be a good neighbor."

He added: "I don't need anyone lecturing me and telling me not to be disagreeable."