There’s no qualification to be a developer to access github though, I think is what the person you responded to is saying. It’s entirely possible for a user to end up at github without a true understanding of its purpose. Therefore, it would be helpful if it was more clear to the average non-developer user that what they’re looking at is a code repository and is not meant for general consumption.
And that’s the problem with modern internet and consumerism. I get your point, but the “I’m here, so I should be made comfortable and tended to” mentality really has no place in some situations. If you end up on a car parts website and have no idea what’s going on, you don’t just comment “Hey, this is really complicated, and no one warned me. Please consider making it more noob-friendly” because people usually know better, and understand that some things are outside their grasp, and that’s ok. This can be applied to academia sources as well. You would rarely see “What the hell is this all about?” below a rocket science article.
So, my point is, GitHub is for people who at least know how to open the command prompt on windows. Maybe they should use this as a warning next to any GitHub link, idk.
I agree with most of what you said but it wouldn’t hurt to create a watered down version of the site and put it on a subdomain like noobs.github.com … There can be separate UIs for different kinds of users.
They could ask when you register an account what you intend to use GitHub for and what your familiarity is.
I see you you’ve decided to take the road of not reading anything that has been said. There’s no bad usability OR lack of features for literally anyone relevant to these platforms.
There’s no qualification to be a developer to access github though, I think is what the person you responded to is saying. It’s entirely possible for a user to end up at github without a true understanding of its purpose. Therefore, it would be helpful if it was more clear to the average non-developer user that what they’re looking at is a code repository and is not meant for general consumption.
And that’s the problem with modern internet and consumerism. I get your point, but the “I’m here, so I should be made comfortable and tended to” mentality really has no place in some situations. If you end up on a car parts website and have no idea what’s going on, you don’t just comment “Hey, this is really complicated, and no one warned me. Please consider making it more noob-friendly” because people usually know better, and understand that some things are outside their grasp, and that’s ok. This can be applied to academia sources as well. You would rarely see “What the hell is this all about?” below a rocket science article. So, my point is, GitHub is for people who at least know how to open the command prompt on windows. Maybe they should use this as a warning next to any GitHub link, idk.
I agree with most of what you said but it wouldn’t hurt to create a watered down version of the site and put it on a subdomain like noobs.github.com … There can be separate UIs for different kinds of users.
They could ask when you register an account what you intend to use GitHub for and what your familiarity is.
Blaming bad usability/lack of features on the user is just what it: a bad excuse.
I see you you’ve decided to take the road of not reading anything that has been said. There’s no bad usability OR lack of features for literally anyone relevant to these platforms.