[thesite] improved? rating layout

[aardvark]

> From: Madhu Menon <webguru at vsnl.net>
[...] 
> 1) The "rated very good to excellent" statement, apart from really
> kicking English in the balls, is vague. I feel that your gauge conveys
> the information much better. Hence, the line is redundant.

yeah, i don't like that chunk of text... the article *isn't* rated to 
excellent, IMO, so it seems a bit odd... i don't think we need it...

[...]
> 3) Trivial point: If we changed the border on the table from 3D
> borders to a flat border, it would look better.

use CSS for that... and i'd rather not see red hard-coded as the 
gauge... red means too many things that don't apply here...

i'd rather see us pull the color in from *somewhere* in the existing 
CSS, although i have no idea where.. same with the borders... 
added advantage is extra flexibility across new CSS docs...

> 4) I see you've adopted the poor-excellent scale. Good choice. <g>

+1... kinda

i've rated articles as good that i now would need to drop from 4 to 3 
to keep their 'good' rating... just a thought...

and i'll refrain from comment on the <small>

> Unrelated comments:
> 1) The "Additional articles published on evolt.org by this author"
> section is too much like a rectangular mass of lines. It needs a bit
> more leading i.e., breathing room between lines. This helps
> readability (that underlines already destroy).

don't forget that leading is something that was gutted from the CSS 
(specifically from the class .content) because of the rendering 
wonkiness it creates in NN4.x...

but the use of the default link color in there makes it hard to read 
the hyperlinks... it's been classed as side, but none of the 
hyperlinks have been classed accordingly...

IOW, i'm not a big fan of the colored box...