16 thoughts on “Our new look

  1. Not thrilled with it. Don’t think it improves readability, and it adds an excessive amount of white space.

  2. Amos and J-bro: isn’t possible it is hard to read because the type is small. Do look at the other posts and let us know if they’re better, please.

  3. I think I liked the old look better too, for what it’s worth — this one hurts my eyes a little….

  4. I can’t compare it with the old look, since the posts with the old look have been transformed in ones with the new look, but in my opinion, it’s a contrast problem. For example, I can barely see the lines that surround the reply form. Remember that some of us are senior citizens. Thanks.

  5. @jj: What am I supposed to be comparing it to, exactly? It’s all in the same format.

  6. sorry for not being clear. The whitehouse-stupak post has a larger size; I thought others did too.

  7. I like it, and think it’s a lot easier to read. Less cluttered, more clean, etc. The right sidebar is also a LOT easier to navigate than the old template/color scheme.

  8. I liked the old look, and this one, well, the great big font at the top has a kind of (excuse me) Stalin-era look to it.

    The black/white/grey color scheme is rather bleak and unfriendly to me, too. I’d be interested in seeing some other options.

  9. I like the sidebar much better, but I think the way the posts are organized (and the grey/white color scheme of the posts and comments) would probably make for less comfortable reading of longer and more substantive posts and discussions. Some of this could perhaps be remedied by a different color scheme and widening the post part of the page leftward, to allow more words per line. (A different color scheme might also reduce the stridency of the header that lga had mentioned.)

  10. Sidebar is much better.

    The rest is less friendly. Big black letters, black and red- I liked the site because it DID NOT have that. A whole different message now, really.

Comments are closed.