Websnark

Comment from: Aerin posted at August 24, 2005 2:19 AM

Whoa! I did a force-reload, and suddenly it's all shiny and blue! (And a sort of pinky-purple, but maybe that's my monitor.) Though I must note that the note at the top has said "Beware the adipose ninja" for quite some time.

Comment from: Dire posted at August 24, 2005 2:29 AM

I like it, maybe have larger text though so I dont kill my eyes squinting at the screen or have to resort to getting intimate with my moniter.

Comment from: John Lynch posted at August 24, 2005 2:45 AM

The new stylesheet is much more.... visible. :P

You've broken the main page, it's just some stylesheet code

*checks before submitting*

Dang, well you've fixed it again. Looking nice. And the categories, they're actually usable :D

Comment from: miyaa posted at August 24, 2005 2:50 AM

Are you going to be able to change the colours for festive occasions, like Boxer Day?

Comment from: Karacan posted at August 24, 2005 7:00 AM

I like it... however, the simplistic style of "ye olde site" had an interesting effect on me I cannot see here - I would never have bookmarked Websnark.

Part of the ritual reading of Websnark always was to enter the url manually, sometimes several times a day. Because it fit - you write, I write to read what you write.

Um... well. Not going anywhere here, but... well. New site layout. New bookmark.

Comment from: 32_footsteps posted at August 24, 2005 9:38 AM

Shrug... really, I don't care one way or another. The site is just as readable to me now as it was yesterday. That's all I really care about. My only request, as it has been for months, is that longer entries get put behind a cut (especially if you're going to have the last seven days' worth of entries on the front page).

Comment from: Matt Sweeney posted at August 24, 2005 9:54 AM

Oh crap, I just hit refresh and now I see everything. I was wondering what the big deal was. Wow, I need to take a moment to process this.

Comment from: J.(Channing)Wells posted at August 24, 2005 10:34 AM

Not bad. A little wrangled and complex to my eye, but I think that's just my usual conservativism digging its heels in, and I feel this shouldn't be used to judge the site either in an objective sense or from the viewpoint of the new visitor. I suspect that I'll come to appreciate the new design shortly.

I do have a question, however, though keep in mind that I am grinning as I ask it. The new page-top blurb seems to give Weds full co-author status, presenting Websnark as a joint Burns/White production (as opposed to the old philosophy which seemed to be "Eric Burns, with Special Guest Star Wednesday White!")

...so if she's really an equal partner, why does Eric get all the unaffixed entries, while Wednesday's are marked by her special [w]-tag? Where's the [e]-tag, I ask? ;)

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at August 24, 2005 10:38 AM

That's... actually a good point, Channing.

Comment from: J.(Channing)Wells posted at August 24, 2005 10:46 AM

Savor it, Eric. I only get one good point every couple years or so.

Comment from: Tangent posted at August 24, 2005 11:28 AM

Looks rather stark. Almost hurts the eyes. I think it's the font type.

Interesting design though.

Rob

Comment from: HydrogenGuy posted at August 24, 2005 11:51 AM

"And besides, shaking things up is just plain American.

Or, you know. Canadian."

Yes. Shaking things up is very Canadian.

Or, rather, saying you're going to shake things up, appointing a Royal Commission to study the matter, sending Bob Rae across the country holding town meetings, and then, five years later, actually shaking up about 10% of the things you originally said you were going to shake up.

After which everyone is screaming at you to un-shake it or rolling their eyes about how it's too little, too late.

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at August 24, 2005 11:57 AM

Hm. It's the same default font as before, but it switches to Arial instead of Helvetica if you don't have that font in your system. So maybe sticking Helvetica back in there instead will unstark it a bit.

Agreed on the line. It should be underneath the "Posted by" tag, since that tag is already visually distinct from the post itself. I'll work on it a bit later. ;)

Comment from: Matt Sweeney posted at August 24, 2005 2:46 PM

OK, after playing with it a little bit, a couple of thoughts.

Recent Comments section: Totally rocks!

Blockquotes: I guess these were here before? Either way, I like them, they make quoteing a lot cleaner.

Loss of bar in comments layout: I still prefer having the bar, but I'm getting used to not having it. It really is just a silly little preference on my part.

Anyway, the overhaul is a success in my book, thank you very much Eric and Wednesday.

Comment from: quiller posted at August 24, 2005 3:28 PM

Honestly, I'm a little freaked out by the changes. This format somehow seems less soothing and less readable to me, but without a side by side comparison I'm not sure where to indicate the changes. I guess the less soothing is the blue instead of the umm, camo green? Perhaps the readability is the fonts thing, and was there more of a grey background before?

I do like the sidebar changes. It does look a little silly to see some of those titles repeated again and again in the comments section, though. But not necessarily a bad kind of silly.

Comment from: Matt Sweeney posted at August 24, 2005 3:33 PM

I can't express how much I'm loving the Recent Comments section. Though, the number of times my name appears in that list may be some indication. Is it just me or have there been more comments today then previously?

Hmm... i wonder if I can get all 20 comments in the list to be from me?

Tangent, I'm after your crown damn it. :)

Comment from: TheNintenGenius posted at August 24, 2005 3:55 PM

And soon after the introduction of the Recent Comments, there was the influx of the post whores, and yea they posted mightily for it gave them front page exposure and it was good.

(I'm feeling snarky today. Must be the fact that I've been reading through Something Positive's archives and it's rubbing off on me.)

Comment from: siwangmu posted at August 24, 2005 4:02 PM

Ninty(heeheehee... Ninty): No, we always did this, it's just much more obvious now and the shame hasn't kicked in. That said, it will be a little more embarassing when you're gone for a while, come back, and comment on all the interesting threads, even the dead ones, and then it's your name all ocd-looking on the front page... then will probably come the shame.

Comment from: KJToo posted at August 24, 2005 4:46 PM

I normally prefer a little white space to the left and right (tightens things up a bit, I think), but I totally less-than three the new design (sorry, that won't happen again, I swear).

I like the solution to the ambiguous comment:author relationship, too. It'd be cool if you could use an alternating background color (even something as subtle as #eee/#fff) to further differentiate comments. I'm sure that'd be a pain in the proverbial burro to accomplish, though.

Ignore me. I'm only posting this so my name will appear (however briefly) in the Recent Comments section on the main page. My favorite motive flavor: ulterior.

Comment from: Kate Sith posted at August 24, 2005 5:38 PM

Oooh. Slick. I like.

Comment from: gwalla posted at August 24, 2005 9:21 PM

Hmm...nice. Main typeface should be Gentium, however. (Too bad nobody has it installed) ;)

Comment from: Wednesday posted at August 24, 2005 9:51 PM

I have Gentium installed. It's nice. But, after struggling with Bitstream Vera Serif over on Gossamer Commons, I'm a bit wary of Incredible Wonderful Should-Be-Standard-But-Isn't fonts.

Comment from: Phil Kahn posted at August 25, 2005 2:13 AM

Honestly, I like the old look better. That's probably just me though.

Comment from: siwangmu posted at August 25, 2005 3:41 PM

Okay, um, I'm a moron and I suck, but I have only just (finally) realized that I am, in fact, definitely seeing the wrong font (had left old-websnark open on another comp and compared). Can you tell me how I go about sticking helvetica back in? Probably the font thing was the only reason the new look hit me so badly. But, uh, why is it so many of us seem to be having this problem? Can you explain it for the tech-stupid (in commenter-dummy-talk, to misquote Firefly)?

Please help me make the words visually as well as in other ways pretty again! I will love you both even more!

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: