That's nice. I don't like to scroll. Surely there's someone else in the world like me.
From the article you linked:
"[P]eople used the scrollbar on 76% of the pages,
with 22% being scrolled all the way to the bottom
That's a low enough conversion rate for certain page types that it may not always be worth the effort. If I want something, I'm happy to scroll, but if I'm browsing, there had better be a good value proposition in doing so.
"Another eye-tracking study conducted by CX Partners
confirms that people do scroll if certain design
guidelines are followed"
... So, the article says (several times) people scroll, but only under certain design conditions. Is a long form article worth scrolling for? Usually; it's better than ad-ridden pagination, I think we'll both agree. Where the OP went wrong, I think, was that the scrolling was a design gimmick, not a content opportunity. It came across, to me, like the purpose of scrolling was to be
"artsy" and "design-minded", rather than to convey content. Perhaps what I'm attributing to the scrolling design was really a lack of editing for length.
Jakob Neilsen (who was mentioned in the article you linked) also comments on why scrolling might be less of a good idea [1]:
"scrolling ... can be difficult for users with motor skill impairments."
"Low-literacy users can't easily reacquire their position in the text
after it moves.
"Elderly users often have trouble getting to the right spot in scrolling
menus and other small scrolling items.
Not everything you read on the Internet is wholly true.
