I also mentioned this a few times. If done right, it helps immensely… we saw 40% in activation after a well thought on-boarding wizard.
Explaining the concepts step by step should be a big win for the user, doesn’t matter how easy it looks for Fibery team or existing users, for a new users it’s a totally different and can get overwhelming pretty fast with so many terms to grasp.
If you check Notion, there is no on-boarding wizard and it seems they are doing fine 
No, it is not. It was a pain for me to find a framework for my personal space. But it is resolved by many YouTube videos with step-by-step guides.
We thought about some gamification and points system. For example, Accumulate 25 points and get $100 credit to your Fibery account, next level: accumulate 40 points and get $200. We can even replace points with $, so 1p = $3. It will be even more visible, “I added new View, I got $10”.
Point is an action, like Open some View, Add a Rule, Add a Database, etc.
You don’t know how much of their activation is tied to their popularity, people may stick with a poor product because everybody is recommending them and you see them everywhere… user think well, if everybody is using them I should “struggle” myself to learn them and most do.
But if you reduce the popularity to the one of Fibery, same number of videos/articles, etc , most likely they will have similar activation issues.
I know it’s hard to grasp this when you know the product very well and not used to onboarding stuff, I doubted about that myself until I saw the results. The truth is, the easiest you make it for the user to understand the product, the easier is to activate them.
With reference to the new changes, permissions and simplifying fibery for normal users of a workspace (not designing/editor users):
I hope this makes sense as a suggestion.
We are thinking into this direction:
Creator will see Space editor
Non-creator will see Space description with text/images
I like that 
I’d especially like to go through challenges which teach me some of the more advanced tricks and functionality. It might be less worrying to do this in a ‘sandbox’ workspace, or a ‘training’ workspace that only I have access to.
To be honest, points don’t even have to accumulate credit. Kudos might be enough to motivate most. NFTs would be very cool though! OliveX (fitness software) have raised a massive amount of non-dilutive funding by launching DOSE token: www.dosetoken.com.
This concept now learning experiences platform , LXP an simplified learning managements
I don’t mean to resurrect this old thread but wasn’t sure where else to ask this question that has been in my head for some time: why do databases (types) have to be created inside specific spaces (apps)? The paradigm made sense to me when I started (and still does to some extent) but given that fibery’s super power is that you are able to create relations across spaces and views can assemble data across different databases, I wonder why is it necessary to organize spaces around specific databases (data types).
So that got me wondering if an alternative might be to have a single area where databases are created and managed (with ability to organize and classify them into groups/etc and visualize relationships). That area won’t be accessed much by anyone other than creators/admins. Spaces are then reserved as areas where specific business logic, processes and knowledge are organized across many different databases through documents, views, dashboards and workflows/apps (more organized series of views that help you get a multi-step process completed). I think this is a more intuitive setup if the final goal is to have structured and unstructured data at the same level of importance/focus in fibery.
Right now unstructured data feels a bit homeless in fibery as it is either in rich text fields or documents peppered across the space. With this approach, you can have spaces that are predominantly driven by structured data through views (tables/boards/etc.) and spaces that are mostly unstructured documents (thanks to blocks) and those that are mix of both.
I feel other tools like notion and coda, go the other way where you have to build your structured data inside a document that can be buried within a nested structure of folders and documents. I think that paradigm preferences unstructured data over structured. I am wondering if there is a happy medium somewhere.
I know this makes creating templates/apps more difficult as things are not in one place (among many other issues that I can’t even think of) but I wondered if this thought had been explored by the fibery team.
One reason why databases are currently grouped into spaces is that permissions are defined at the space level and all databases/views inherit them.
Of course, when more granular permissions are implemented, there would be no reason why you couldn’t structure your workspace as you describe (databases in one area and docs/views/dashboards etc. living in other places).
Having said that, I guess the ‘homelessness’ of unstructured data will be somewhat mitigated by the work on ‘blocks’ whereby docs/rich text can live within entities, and entities (in the form of views) can live in docs. Hopefully, thing become more ‘glued’ together…
In general most people need something to organize information. Space is very close to just Folder now. Here are Space functions:
I don’t think complete database / views separation will be a better mental model. Most likely people will struggle with it even more.