Rule: ensure FLAWLESS functionality and no visible bugs on a new site — bugs read as "phishing / unsafe" (Baymard); a beautiful but broken site is still a failed site

Rule: Ensure flawless functionality and no visible bugs on a new site. Visible bugs (broken forms, layout collapse, JS errors, dead links, console warnings) read as "phishing / unsafe" to a first-time visitor with no prior trust in the brand.

Why: Baymard's checkout research found perceived security is driven by gut feeling about how visually secure the page looks (Baymard Institute checkout research — average user's perception of a site's security is largely "gut feeling… directed by how visually secure the page looks"; PERCEIVED security ≠ real security). Aesthetic-usability (Aesthetic-usability effect — Kurosu & Kashimura (1995): 26 ATM-interface variations, 252 participants ("apparent usability is less correlated with inherent usability than with apparent beauty"); replicated cross-culturally and post-use by Tractinsky et al. (2000)) masks minor flaws only — a beautiful checkout that crashes is still a failed checkout. NN/g's "a single violation of trust can destroy years of slowly accumulated credibility" (Nielsen Norman Group four durable trust factors (Nielsen 1999; Aurora Harley cross-cultural study): design quality, upfront disclosure, comprehensive/current content, connection to the rest of the web — stable across decades; "a single violation of trust can destroy years of slowly accumulated credibility") applies even more strongly to a site that has no accumulated credibility to spend.

How to apply: Before launch, run the site through (a) a fresh-browser/no-history smoke test on mobile + desktop, (b) every form path including failure states, (c) the actual checkout/contact funnel end-to-end. Any visible bug — including console errors a savvy visitor might open devtools to see — is a launch blocker on a brand-new site.