A side-by-side guide to help Ashe CLT choose between two design approaches: one optimised for accessibility and plain language, one that follows the beta spec exactly with built-in tooltips.
Foundation
The public-facing website — home page, Our Story, How It Works, and the overall visual design — is identical in both versions. The differences are confined entirely to the Join/Donate flow and the member dashboard.
The Core Choice
The difference is a deliberate tradeoff between familiarity and precision. Version A removes jargon and speaks the way a neighbour would. Version B preserves the spec's exact terminology — which matters for legal accuracy and staff consistency — but adds hover tooltips so every term is explained in context.
Flow Steps
Every label in the six-step Join/Donate flow, shown side by side.
Version B Feature
Every tooltip in Version B is crafted to define the term and explain what the user should expect or do next. Hover the ? icons below to preview a selection.
Recommendation
The right choice depends on who Ashe CLT expects will use the site most, and how the team communicates internally. Both versions are fully spec-compliant.
| User type | Best version | Why |
|---|---|---|
| First-time visitor from Ashe County — no CLT knowledge | Version A | Plain language removes every barrier. "I'm an individual" and "Sign me up" are instantly understood without any prior context. |
| Older community member less comfortable with technology | Version A | Warm, conversational phrasing reduces anxiety. "Almost there!" and "You're all set!" feel reassuring rather than transactional. |
| Board member or committee lead testing the site | Version B | Spec-accurate language matches internal documents and staff communications. Tooltips confirm the system works as designed. |
| Repeat member managing their account | Either | Familiar with CLT terms either way. Version B's tooltips add value on nuanced items like abstaining or expense status. |
| Local business or organisation joining as a supporter | Version B | Organisations tend to be more comfortable with formal language and appreciate precise terminology for record-keeping. |
| Donor making a one-time gift | Version A | "How much would you like to give?" with a mission reminder right before payment is proven to increase conversion in nonprofit giving flows. |
Our Take
Present Version A as the primary proposal — it directly addresses the "easy to use for everyone, no matter how much you know about computers" mandate from the email. Present Version B as the alternative for teams that need spec-accurate terminology for staff consistency. The Ashe CLT board can make the call based on who they expect to use the site most: general community members or internal staff and committee leads.
The two versions could be merged: use Version A's simplified language throughout the public-facing join flow (Steps 1–6), but use Version B's spec-accurate language with tooltips inside the member dashboard (where users are already enrolled and more familiar with the organisation). This would give first-time donors the warmest path in, while giving active members the precision they need once logged in.
asheclt-version-a-simplified.html — Full site, simplified language throughout.
asheclt-version-b-spec-tooltips.html — Full site, spec language with hover tooltips on all technical terms.
asheclt-comparison-guide.html — This document.