11

On the election primary page, some nomination texts are faded out and there are no voting buttons. I'm guessing this is becauase, as per the sidebar,

nominees may withdraw at their discretion at any point during the nomination phase.

But if I were having a really dense day (...) and had sat there for 15 minutes wondering what on earth it meant... would it help to have some text that explains this?!

2
  • Vote counts have by the way been reappeared on the faded entries.
    – user138231
    Jan 26, 2011 at 1:55
  • FWIW, until I saw this MSO post, I thought faded posts were for candidates who had gotten many more downvotes than upvotes.
    – Pops
    Jan 26, 2011 at 15:18

4 Answers 4

10

We have added withdrawn date and info at the bottom.

0
18

I'd argue that candidates who withdraw should simply be removed. The faded entry has no purpose, makes the page longer than it needs to be, is confusing, and serves as a bitter, bitter reminder to the one guy that didn't make the top 30 that he was that close.

4
  • 2
    it serves as a marker for people who saw the candidate before and want to know why he's no longer there. Otherwise, expect people to file bug reports in the vein of "X was here, but now he's not, is this a bug? What happened?"
    – user149432
    Jan 26, 2011 at 0:20
  • 1
    @Mark - We're perhaps going to get even more questions, "Why is X faded out?" since it's not a common UI feature on SO. Let's at least agree to put all the faded/withdrawn submission on the bottom.
    – Pollyanna
    Jan 26, 2011 at 1:02
  • 4
    @Mark if that's an issue, I think a better solution would be to simply list withdrawn candidates at the bottom of the page. Once someone withdraws, I think it would also make sense to remove their "campaign statement". Jan 26, 2011 at 1:14
  • 1
    @David I just think removing them outright is a mistake. I don't have any opinion about the positioning of the candidates, although putting them at the bottom makes sense. But regardless of the positioning of the entries, there should be some textual indication that the nomination has been withdrawn, as the OP requests: graying out as the only indicator is confusing. An <h3> header on the nomination that says "This nomination has been withdrawn" would suffice.
    – user149432
    Jan 26, 2011 at 1:25
4

Another option to prevent confusion is to replace their nomination text with Withdrawn

3

I came to Meta because I was wondering whether to report a bug on the voting page: that some candidates have no up/down votable arrows.

So, yes: I *did* find that confusing/inexplicable; I didn't even notice that the color of their text was relatively faded.

If you want to keep their entry visible then perhaps use strikethrough: I can barely see the difference between gray and black (that might depend on your monitor's contrast). And showing the voting arrows disabled might be better than not showing them at all.

I also had a warning from my browser (I'm using IE) that a script on that page was running for too long: so I thought that my not seeing voting arrows was maybe an artefact/bug as a result of that (an interrupted script).


Edit:

Puting a strikethrough through the user's name might be a good, minimal UI (if you like minimal): because that shows that the user's name was deleted from the list of candidates.

Anything except nothing: to show that it's on pupose, and not just an omission, and not just some script accident.

1
  • 1
    Strikethrough on the whole submission may not be the best choice for the sake of readability. Perhaps just on the other portions? Jan 26, 2011 at 1:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .