Completed Tasks

User Personas

Person Responsible: Gavin

Due Date: Oct 29

We created two user personas Chris and Janet to represent different audience groups who share the same need for authentic social connection but approach it in unique ways.

Chris, 23, is a college senior studying electrical engineering. He’s social, curious, and tech-savvy but often finds traditional social media overwhelming and performative. Chris wants a space that feels casual and genuine where he can share what he’s currently listening to or watching without pressure or judgment. His needs center on simplicity, self-expression, and staying close with friends through real updates rather than curated posts.

Janet, 32, is a business analyst balancing a demanding work schedule. She values privacy, intentionality, and genuine relationships. Unlike Chris, she’s more selective about what she shares and seeks a calmer, less distracting social environment. Janet’s needs focus on control, comfort, and meaningful reconnection tools that make staying in touch feel natural, not forced.

Together, these personas capture two sides of our app’s purpose: creating a non-performative social platform that adapts to different lifestyles and motivations while promoting authentic, mindful interaction. Whether it’s a busy professional maintaining real friendships or a student keeping up with close connections, both reflect our mission to design a healthier, more human approach to social media.

Nudge + Notification research

Person(s) Responsible: Joe

Due Date: Oct 29

We’ve wrapped up our initial research phase exploring ethical notification design through Stephen Wendel’s Designing for Behavior Change and supporting sources like Nudge and the Center for Humane Technology.
Key takeaways so far:
• Notifications can either foster connection or fuel anxiety — the difference lies in timing, tone, and user control.
• Wendel’s CREATE funnel helped us understand the full decision process users go through before opening an app (Cue → Reaction → Evaluation → Ability → Timing → Experience).
• Loam’s opportunity lies in designing notifications that bridge the intention–action gap — gently supporting meaningful social behavior without manipulation or overload.

Next steps:
We’re entering the application phase, where we’ll translate CREATE into wireframes and low-fi prototypes that test how different notification styles, tones, and triggers affect engagement and wellbeing.
We’ll also begin drafting Loam’s Notification Philosophy — a concise set of principles to guide ethical, accessible, and emotionally intelligent design going forward.

Colors

Person(s) Responsible: Chem, Enoch

Due Date: Oct 28

We finalized our main color pallet based on the information we collected from our desirability study:

• Users feel that loam should evoke feelings of growth (64%), warmth (56%), and calmness (52%).

• Words that best describe Loam include organic (72%), natural (60%), and friendly (56%).

• Users agree that Loam should feel cozy, nurturing, and personal (92%).

• Many users envision natural elements like trees, plants, and roots when hearing the words “growth” or “connection.”

• 88% of users think that plants and roots visually represent lose relationships or meaningful connections.

With this in mind we wanted to go with colors that represented the earth and what comes from it. So we have a brown and clay colors for soil itself, and greens for plants. Lastly we chose an off-white to drive the natural feel.

Wireframes

Person(s) Responsible: Chem, Enoch, Ella, Max

Due Date: Oct 28

We completed our wireframes following our Kano feature-survey. The results validated the features we are moving forward with and helped inform what we should be prioritizing.

Wireframe testing

Person(s) Responsible: Gavin, Joe, Dom, Max

Due Date: Oct 28

1. Onboarding & Value Proposition

This was the area of greatest friction. While the flow was seen as standard, the purpose of the app was not successfully communicated, causing confusion from the very first screens.

• Critical Finding: Users Don't Understand the App's Purpose

  • Multiple users stated they were "not completely clear on what the purpose of the app is" even after starting onboarding.

  • Users need the concept explained earlier. One suggested an "infographic to explain the concept," and one noted the app "needs more explanation in onboarding."

  • Without this context, one user ) initially assumed the app was for "music or digital media" logging, not social media.

• Major Pain Point: "What are you looking for?" Screen

  • This screen was the single biggest point of confusion. One user found it "a little confusing" and thought it felt "like a search engine."

  • Their mental model was discovery (e.g., "find a new album") not profile building (adding their own interests).

  • Jordyn also found this screen confusing, noting that a simpler "interests sign with plus screen was better."

• Friction Point: Connecting External Accounts

  • Placing the Spotify connection so early in the flow was confusing for multiple users.

  • Users didn't understand what this "has to do with the app" and "didn’t want to connect Spotify/bio/external accounts until after the setup was finished".

• High Churn Risk: The onboarding friction is high enough that one user explicitly stated they "might consider skipping my interest section... to kind of get a feel for the app first."

2. Posting Flow & Terminology

Users found the posting flow "straightforward" but identified key areas of confusion and missing features that are causing friction.

• Critical Finding: "Title" vs. "Caption" Confusion

  • One user identified a major inconsistency: the posting screen uses "Title" and "Caption," while the feed uses "Title" and "Subtitle."

  • The user strongly preferred "Caption," as it implied a place for "my real thoughts" and "long-form text," whereas "Subtitle" felt "confined."

  • Actionable Suggestion: The user proposed using "Title" and "Caption" and only showing the Title on the main feed. This would prevent the feed from looking "cramped" while allowing users to tap in to read the full caption.

• Confusion: Posting Media vs. General Updates

  • Multiple users were confused about how to post different types of content.

  • One noted he "wasn’t clear about whether he was adding a movie/show or making a general post."

  • Another was unsure "how to post about a book or movie or other media like he saw on the main feed."

• Missing Features: Drafts & Editing

  • The lack of a "save for later button" or draft option was noted by multiple users.

  • One found the lack of "editing flexibility" to be the "most frustrating part" of the experience. They want to "preview how posts appear on the profile" and have basic tools like cropping, while agreeing that heavy filters should be removed to encourage authenticity.

3. Feed, Profiles, & Navigation

Feedback on the core layout was positive regarding simplicity, but mixed on the "bento box" layout and confusing regarding "groups."

• Positive: Simplicity & Clarity

  • One "consistently found the layouts clear, intuitive, and easy to follow," describing them as "straightforward." They strongly favored "as simple as possible" designs.

  • Another agreed the "UI looks clean."

• Mixed Feedback: Feed Layout

  • One "prefers the bento box layout over a standard feed," finding it helps "showcase more at once and feels unique."

  • Conversely, another user was concerned the two-column layout "it could end up being kind of cramped," especially with text posts.

• Confusion Point: "Groups" / Categories

  • The "groups bar" at the top of the feed was a point of confusion.

  • One immediately associated them with Instagram filters and "expected to click them to filter by theme."

  • Another user was unsure how they worked: "Do people have to agree to being in a group? Are they added like a group chat?"

4. Positive Validation & Core Concept

Despite the onboarding issues, the app's core mission and design philosophy resonated strongly with users who understood it.

• Win: Design Successfully Discourages Performative Content

  • This is our biggest win. One explicitly stated the design "does not encourage performative behavior."

    • They validated our decision for a chronological feed, highlighting that "eliminating the algorithm is a key factor in 'weeding out' rage bait and performative content."

  • Another also supported this, stating that "fewer features encourage authenticity."

• Win: Core UI is Intuitive

  • Navigation patterns align with users' mental models for social apps.

  • Features like comment and reaction screens were found to be "self-explanatory".

• Win: Concept is "Unique" and "Interesting"

  • Users who grasped the concept found it "fresh and promising" and "unique".

  • The "rings connection screen" was highlighted as "interesting" and "unique".

5. Future Opportunities & Feature Ideas

• Expand "Interests" to "Hobbies": One user wanted to add hobbies like "skydiving or hiking," not just media. Their goal was to "find communities based on what you're interested in," similar to Reddit.

• Strengthen Branding: Jordyn felt the visuals could be more "homey and comfortable" and wanted to see the branding "fully integrated" with a "nostalgia-driven feel."

• "Plant Growth" Concept: Jordyn suggested a "plant-growth connection system" where a virtual plant "grows" as two users interact, tying directly into the "Loam" brand name.

• Show High-Fidelity Profiles: One user expressed a desire to see "what a full profile would actually look like in high fidelity."

Kano Analysis

Person(s) Responsible: Dom

Due Date: Oct 29

Utilizing the results of our Kano survey, I had two axis worth of information. One being how users felt about each feature being present, the other being how they would feel if the feature was not present. Traditionally, Kano graphs have one axis representing how far along each feature is in terms of implementation and one axis representing how users feel about that feature. I felt that this would be ineffective considering that none of our features are implemented at all - we are still at the beginning stages of wireframes/low-fi. This is why I chose to construct the graph contrasting how users felt about features being present vs not present. This also gives us the ability to view how important certain features are; if users are excited to see a feature as present but disappointed to see it as not present, we can prioritize that feature compared to ones that users feel more lukewarm about.

In terms of results, nearly every feature fell into the lower right quadrant: users wanted to see the features present and would be unhappy to not see these features. That being said, certain features stood out as notable. The “Interest Based Profile” fell deep in the “satisfying if present” category and medium-deep in the “unsatisfying if absent” category, meaning it is worth pursuing. This was our most promising feature based on the Kano graph. On the other hand, features like text posts and likes were seen with little excitement - they feel toward the middle of the graph meaning that users did not feel very strongly either way. Photo posts were notable as being quite unsatisfying if absent based on our data as well.

Database Schema

Person(s) Responsible: Max, Ella

Due Date: Oct 29

Here is our running database schema to be created in supabase. We ran everything by Phil and it seems good so far, we assume that it will change as we dive into dev but this is a great starting point.

Connect Supabase

Person(s) Responsible: Ella

Due Date: Oct 29

Created a supabase database for our production site and connected it to the codebase.

Dev Update

Person(s) Responsible: Ella, Max

Due Date: Oct 29

• we're doing a svelte web-app - RIP mobile

• Have a database design in a good spot

• Met with Phil to discuss our next steps and start thinking about edge cases in the backend

• Going to set up docker to have a local version of the database

• Need to lock down a plan for image transformation and storage