rdfs:comment
| - Well, we tried a while ago, but the "keep it ugly" forces won out. Sue Gardner's comments don't help, either. [1] Tony (talk) 03:08, 14 July 2012 (UTC) I'd take exception to the "'keep it ugly' forces" remark, but Sue's comments don't make it easy. While she could have worded some of her statements better, her point is valid. Reddit is a good example of a website that's thrived in spite of (in part, because of) its "ugly", bare-bones interface. Meanwhile, competitor Digg, which was much slicker to begin with, self-destructed despite becoming fancier and more high-tech. (That isn't the main reason why its popularity plummeted, but it did nothing to help.) Here's a relevant article from Forbes. I'm not saying that we shouldn't pursue a main page redesign, but we need to be careful abo
|
abstract
| - Well, we tried a while ago, but the "keep it ugly" forces won out. Sue Gardner's comments don't help, either. [1] Tony (talk) 03:08, 14 July 2012 (UTC) I'd take exception to the "'keep it ugly' forces" remark, but Sue's comments don't make it easy. While she could have worded some of her statements better, her point is valid. Reddit is a good example of a website that's thrived in spite of (in part, because of) its "ugly", bare-bones interface. Meanwhile, competitor Digg, which was much slicker to begin with, self-destructed despite becoming fancier and more high-tech. (That isn't the main reason why its popularity plummeted, but it did nothing to help.) Here's a relevant article from Forbes. I'm not saying that we shouldn't pursue a main page redesign, but we need to be careful about the direction we take. The current design, while long in the tooth, does have a certain charm. —David Levy 03:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC) No it doesn't; Tony is quite right. The "keep it ugly" forces did win. Malleus Fatuorum 03:51, 14 July 2012 (UTC) And what, in your view, motivated these editors? Malice? Spite? As noted above, I agree that we should pursue a main page redesign. But we need to work together, acknowledging and respecting each other's concerns. An adversarial approach won't lead to consensus. —David Levy 04:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC) What motivated them was an unwillingness to accept change, an all too pervasive attitude here. No significant change will ever occur here if it must first gain a consensus among those who oppose all change. Malleus Fatuorum 04:14, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
|