---
# System prepended metadata

title: Untitled

---

**Design Recommendations**

**Summary:**

During the sessions, several critical points requiring review have been identified:

1. **Comments Section on the Proposal Page:**
   - The combination of the "Support" button and the options "In favor/Neutral/Against" in the comments section is confusing.
   - Users struggled to understand the target of these three actions, where they are reflected, how they relate to "Support," and the thumb up/down options for existing comments.
  
2. **Lack of Context for Direct Proposal Links:**
   - When users receive a direct link to a proposal, there is a lack of context. It's unclear where this proposal originates, whether it is part of a larger process, or provides sufficient background information.

3. **Clarity on "Give Support" Action:**
   - Users expressed uncertainty about the meaning and consequences of the "Give Support" action.
   - Questions arose regarding how proposals are selected for acceptance, the total number of supports required, and other related aspects.

4. **Non-Reading of Participation Rules:**
   - Participants generally do not read the participation rules, leading to a lack of understanding that their support won't be considered until they attempt to exit the page.

5. **Issues in "Related Content" Section:**
   - Specific doubts were raised in the "Related Content" section; details are outlined below.

**Detailed Feedback:**

*Comments Section:*
   - The simultaneous presence of the "Support" button and the options "In favor/Neutral/Against" in the comments section is confusing for users.
   - Clarification is needed on the target of these three actions, their representation, and their relationship with "Support" and thumb up/down for existing comments.

*Direct Proposal Links:*
   - Proposals shared through direct links lack context for users, leaving uncertainty about their origin and place in the larger process.

*Understanding "Give Support" Action:*
   - Users expressed doubts about the implications of the "Give Support" action and how proposals are selected based on support.

*Non-Reading of Participation Rules:*
   - Lack of awareness among users that their support won't be considered until they attempt to exit the page, emphasizing the importance of understanding participation rules.

*Issues in "Related Content" Section:*
   - Specific doubts and concerns were raised in the "Related Content" section, requiring detailed attention and clarification.

These findings highlight the need for improvements in the mentioned areas to enhance user understanding and interaction with the platform.