I've seen a couple of people here bitching about #Windows prompting you with possible things to do, and how it's not respecting your choices because the other button is "Maybe Later", and not "No".
Folks, you may not have noticed that "Maybe Later" is functionally equivalent to "No" because it, in fact, *doesn't* keep nagging you about things you turned down.
(1/2)
The reason that the button is "Maybe Later" and not "No" is so that you, the user, don't think that your only option is to agree now, regardless of how busy you are with other things, or else lose the option to do whatever it is *forever*.
It's just a little bit of #ux design to hint to you that you aren't making an irrevocable choice. That's all.
Having now explained this, please get the fuck over it.
(2/2)
Logically -- yes, quite possibly it should.
Although I suspect rather fewer people make this assumption in practice than the no-means-forever one, which appears to be a common enough one to appear in "Introduction to UX" books.
(Disclaimer: I'm not a UX expert and I haven't done any testing on this point; I've just read a book or two on how to make my software suck less.)
((Also: heh.))
@cerebrate following this reasoning, shouldn't the other button say 'for now', lest we imagine our soul bound to the agreement eternally?